Peeper

A semi-spoofish deconstruction of 1940s film noir tropes, "Peeper" has plenty of witty dialogues - and monologues - delivered by Michael Caine in his inimitable style ("President Truman said there is now a boom in U. S. economy, but although I leave my window open every night I still can't hear it"), but it is underlit to an excessive degree, and filled with too many overacted "thugs" who are impossible to tell apart (we never really learn why they are after Caine's character, either). This one might have worked better as a radio program. **1/2 out of 4.

This is one of those movies that is just immensely good fun. First of all, it has an excellent cast. Caine is wonderful as the world-weary London private eye adrift in Los Angeles. Michael Constantine, as the ex-con desperate to find his daughter, has never been better. Natalie is very good as the satin-clad femme fatale. And then there's the outstanding supporting cast. In a sense, this film is a tribute to character actors. Even the unappreciated Robert Ito shows up as the sinister Japanese butler.

But even given the cast, what really shines is the W. D. Richter's script. Especially our hero's brilliant analysis of the location of a house based on the angle of the sun and the shadows it casts, followed by his discovery that: "I wasn't even close. It was in Beverly Hills."

On the other hand, your favorite bit may be the Humphrey Bogart impersonator reciting the credits at the beginning of the film to the accompaniment of a lone trumpet (at least, that's how I remember it; actually, since the other reviewer and I seem to be the only people in the world who have actually seen this film, who's to argue?) It's a sad fact that Peeper has been dumped. It doesn't even appear on most filmographies of Michael Caine. It's not available on video in any form, and I have never seen it appear on television (maybe we can persuade The Mystery Channel to show it, if the tape hasn't disintegrated by now). So if there's a patron saint of forgotten films wandering around this site, why don't you see if you can nudge 20th Century Fox into releasing it. It deserves better.

Bumbling PI Leslie C Tucker (Michael Caine) is hired to track down a little girl who was adopted many years ago. Her real father has an inheritance he wants to pass on to her. He tracks the girl to a wealthy family, but there are two daughters. Which of the sisters was adopted? And of course, there are others who would do just about anything to get their hands on the loot.

Peeper is supposedly a film noir spoof. I say "supposedly" because you would expect a spoof to be funny. Watching Peeper, not only did I not laugh, I don't think I even smiled. The script isn't anywhere near as clever and witty as it thinks it is. The jokes fall flat. In fact, flat is a pretty good adjective to use to describe the whole thing. The comedy is flat. The action is flat. The mystery is flat. The acting is flat. Caine is fine, but he's given an abysmal script to work with. It doesn't help much that he has about zero on-screen chemistry with co-star Natalie Wood. Even their scenes together are, well, they're also flat.

Another big problem I had with Peeper is how cheap it all seems. The film is set in the 1940s. Instead, Peeper looks like a poorly dressed film that can't hide its 1970s origins. Rarely did anything have an authentic 1940s feel. The supporting cash doesn't help any either. It's not necessarily their fault, but Michael Constantine, Thayer David, and Don Calfa have a 1970s TV vibe about them.

I honestly think Peeper might have been better had they just made a straightforward 1940s-style PI flick - without the attempts at comedy. I really think I would have enjoyed that much more. As for film noir spoofs, nothing beats Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid. Now that's a funny movie.

4/10

"Peeper" is not a bad little film and it will fit the bill if you are looking for a time-passer. There are also parts of the film I really liked (such as the snappy dialog). But it's also a film that has problems. The plot seems derivative (very much like a reworking of "The Big Sleep"), the story is confusing and inconsistent and the actors seem to try their best with a plot that really seemed forced. Because of all this, I certainly will not heartily recommend it.

The film is set in the 1940s and is introduced by an actor pretending to be Humphrey Bogart. The story itself then begins. A nutty guy (Michael Constantine) gets a private eye (Michael Caine) to take a case. He wants Caine to locate his long-lost daughter, as he wants to make her his heir. The trail leads to the Prendergast family and one of their two daughters MIGHT be the heiress. To complicate things, two thugs are on his tail and seem ready to kill him--and yet, inexplicably, each time Caine captures them he gives them a chance to escape instead of either turning them into the cops or shooting them. This actually frustrated the heck out of me--and again and again, Caine's character seemed to make dumb decisions. I hate films where you must accept the stupidity of the lead in order to make the plot workable! It's a shame, as Natalie Wood is gorgeous and Caine tries his best. It's just the case of a film that needed a re-write before it was actually made.

I just saw this interesting little oddity. This isn't an especially good film, but it's more than good enough to while away an hour and a half. It's a fun little homage to film noir with it's tongue planted firmly in cheek. Great performances by Michael Cine and Natalie Wood as well as an excellent supporting cast plus a well crafted script but the film itself just doesn't quite gel. A big part of that might be due to Peter Hyams, a technically proficient and often overlooked director. Hyams is generally just a director for hire but he really puts a personal touch to every film he directs, although he rarely is given very good material to work with. Peeper was one of his earliest films, and the film's uneven pacing is probably a result of his limited experience. Still, Peeper is a pretty decent film and worth a look. It's a shame the film disappeared after it's initial limited theatrical release, but it is now available on DVD. The print is an excellent digital transfer and there's even about thirty minutes of special features on the making of the film, a nice bonus for a film which has been basically forgotten.