Out of Season

Its obvious that this movie already has some kind of cult following, likely due to one of the female starts and its subject matter. To me this was brand new, despite it being over 40 years and only really having heard of one of the stars. Straight away this feels like a made for TV movie with a kind of Tales Of The Unexpected atmosphere, which lasts all the way to the end. The story concerns an American middle aged man who is revisiting a hotel and woman from his past. The mother has an adult daughter who she is constantly at loggerheads with, and in competition with it seems. The main thread of the story is about the man trying to reconcile with the abrasive and avoidant mother, while trying to fend off the attentions of her daughter.

While I won't spoil the ending, its clear to me that the Amazon Prime version must be an uncut version, as there is no question of who is involved in what. There is enough guessing to do at the end but with the cut I watched, I think the conclusion was quite clear.

Cliff Robertson, Vanessa Redgrave and Susan George gave exceptionally great performances in this fantastic film. The film was full of passion, lust and love. Susan George was very sexy and provocative as the daughter, this was one of her greatest gifts to the film industry with the exception of "Straw Dogs". This is a film you can view over and over again. Make a point to see this film, you will not regret it.

OUT OF SEASON is a dullish three-hander set in an empty hotel occupied by mother Vanessa Redgrave, daughter Susan George, and interloper Cliff Robertson. That kind of character trio has been utilised superbly in the classic ONIBABA and its pseudo remake FAR NORTH, but sadly this drama fails to ignite the screen in the same way. The film was based on a play and thus feels extremely static, conversation based and with little to no incident throughout. Of the characters, Redgrave is stuck with a bore, Robertson a sleaze, and only George makes any impression as the wilful daughter, although her role seems a reprise of her one in the far superior STRAW DOGS.

The British film industry died in the 1970s and I assume films like this put the knife in, the slow tittles set up what were the most boring first 10 minutes of any film I've seen and it never really livened up Susan George was totally miscast as the teenager yet was the best thing in it the other 2 had all the charisma of a block of wood, I did fast forward the last 40 minutes to see how it ended and it was even less satisfying than the start

Surprisingly few people have reviewed this. I expected the Guardian reader to be fawning all over this la-dee-da art work? That they're not should serve as a warning to the wise.

This is dated, and has dated in a way that leaves it there (found bound in some 1970s cinema called the Rex - for the youngsters to get their kicks out of too little naughty, nudity - despite the sexual posters. The dirty men in their macs would have dominated this showing.

It's neither kinky or Bauhaus. It's pants, let me leave that there.

So if it has pretentious aspirations it doesn't make it. I found only the male lead to be convincing. He is easily aroused by George (and who couldn't be?) I wondered if she played this film for the laughs? This is no Killing of Sister George, the actors are poor and unconvincing as a mother daughter routine. (Reid and York (albeit not a mother/daughter relationship) nailed on acting they ain't!), I hope you get the point?

The male has a lazy role and that is convincing. Lazy man getting his oats and seen as a gallant chap rather than a male predatory perv. How cinema has changed!

The story does actually have a great twist and if you must watch it then I will not reveal or spoil the outcome. I will NEVER watch this again. Hence the 1/10. Unremarkable.