Petits meurtres sans importance

It doesn't get any darker than this, folks. Jules Feiffer shows off his penchant for absurdity and his mastery of the monologue (Lou Jacobi, Donald Sutherland and director Alan Arkin each get one powerhouse scene where it's basically all them with the other characters reacting). The cast is excellent and their handling of Feiffer's language is amazing. Elliot Gould's performance is particularly effective, and Vincent Gardenia as his father-in-law is hysterical.

I saw this film and then read the play it was based on, and both give off the same claustrophobic air of desperation while still being side-splittingly funny. It is definitely worth hunting down. In the words of Father Dupas, it is "all right."

Patsy Newquist (Marcia Rodd) is an interior decorator in New York City who rescues a man (Elliott Gould as Alfred Chamberlain) from a prolonged beating that she hears going on outside of her apartment. When she does intervene the group of hooligans turns on her and Alfred does nothing but walk away. After she escapes them, she confronts Alfred about this, who does not apologize. In fact he says nothing. Patsy is instantly smitten by this self acclaimed "apathist", and sets out to make him see life is good and get him trying again - at anything. He is her project, yet she sees this as love.

The backdrop is an increasingly violent NYC in which property is randomly vandalized more than robbed, people are at first attacked - the way that Alfred was - and then random shootings/murders by unnamed snipers begin. Patsy's family of origin are like an educated version of The Bunkers on All In the Family. Eventually they have steel panels installed on their windows so that the snipers will not shoot into their apartment.

Alan Arkin plays a cop driven mad by all of the homicides in which the victims come from every walk, age, and ethnicity and none of them apparently knew their assailants.

Donald Sutherland has a small but memorable role as pastor of the First Existential Church who is able to grant Alfred and Patsy's request that the name of the deity not be mentioned in their wedding ceremony. His sermon - and he airs everybody's dirty linen at this time, apparently not believing in the confidentiality of the clergy - during that service starts a free-for-all fist fight.

The film has a very tie-dyed feel about it that is distinctively early 70s, yet how it deals with all of the random violence, particulary the frightening origin of the random killings in the final scene, seems all too "ripped from the headlines".

Exact rating: 8.25

The pulse of this movie is subversive and menacing, and even though there are many, many great laughs, I think the classification of it as a comedy is wrong. It never feels like a comedy. In terms of tone, it is something like the pilot for Twin Peaks and a Mamet play and an Odets play, but with some strange off off off off Broadway claustrophobia and seventies nihilistic horror. It displays a collapsed and paranoid urban environment in which people are combative with words and isolated by them.

I feel it should be essential viewing for any writer, as it contains four of the best-- if not the actual four best-- monologues I've ever heard in a movie. Arkin and Sutherland have amazing monologues that are only marginally upstaged by those given by Gould and Jacobi.

I laughed many, many times (as did many people in the sold out screening I attended), but when it ended, the haunting and thoughtful core of the movie lingered more than did the comedy.

A rich and allegorical piece that deserves serious study and accolades.

(I saw a 35mm print of the movie at Film Forum, N.Y.)

I just watched this film because my dad recommended it as a movie he

remember as being funny…mabey. I was skeptical at the beginning, I thought to myself a dated film with an absurd summery on the back. The only reason I sat and watched it was the list of actors, Sutherland and Gould. I was immediately enthralled. I have been a fan of Terry Gilliam films for a long time and to see a film that can achieve his insanity and social messages with out the elaborate sets and costumes Gilliam uses is astounding. The acting is superb, there is no other word that can encapsulate these performances. Every character is riveting until the end. The monologues given are thought provoking to say the least. My original thought that this film was dated could not be farther from the truth, I was in fact surprised by the connections that can be drawn to our modern times. I am surprised that this film did not receive more praise. It is also disappointing that the other Alan Arkin films were given less than glowing reviews. The only question I have is: is it to late to have a cult following for this movie? Anyone else in?

A black comedy in every sense of the word. It's too bad that Alan Arkin doesn't direct more movies because he really scored with this one. It's a movie that still seems so fresh today because of its storyline, even after close to 30 years. It was pertinent back then and even more so today. It's great to see appearances here by Arkin and Donald Sutherland, and it's one of Elliott Gould's best roles.

Keep on the lookout for this in your late night t.v. schedule. It's really worth seeing again (and especially if you haven't seen it yet).