O Golpe de Sorte

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.

"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.

Michael Caine is a PI in Los Angeles just after the War. Michael Constantine comes to him and asks him to find his daughter. He had put her in an orphanage in 1918. When he had come back three years later, she had been adopted by a man in a photo. Now he wants Caine to track him down in a plot which mimis and spoofs every nourish movie Humphrey Bogart was in. Along the way he encounters Natalie Wood, who may be the object of his job.

To make the point, the credits are spoken at the beginning by impressionist Guy Marks. It's based on a story by Keith Laumer, a science fiction writer whose works tended to be.... pretty much all the same in his series, and adapted by W.D. Richter, who would write and direct the Doc Savage pastiche THE ADVENTURES OF BUCKAROO BANZAI the following decade. Director Peter Hyams keeps the dialogue moving as fast as he can, but the mannered snappy prose is most of what makes this a spoof...and sounding like the audience has heard it all before.

I found this movie to be incredibly boring. The characters and dialogue were over the top in a bad way.

I did enjoy the character of Anglich. I watched, though, purely for Michael Caine, and as usual, found his acting and character to be entertaining and endearing.

He was way too good for this one.

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.