Butterfly

Pia Zadora was not the worst actress of 1981. Nor was she even close to giving a bad performance. This unknown actress in her mid 20's was able to dazzle the audience with her sexy charm. Let alone, act opposite both Stacey Keach and Orson Welles. That alone is a spectacular in itself. For those haters who shun this movie, I agree. It's a weird movie with weird characters. Still, its better than half the crap Hollywood is making today. This fact along with the fact that people are still viewing this movie, gives a strong defense that Pia did a good job and that this movie is worth the watch.

Another film based upon a book by James M Cain and, naturally, another controversy. Cain's work always tended to focus upon emotions running high and passion, particularly, sexual passion, being exploited for another's gain. Postman Always Rings Twice and Double Indemnity also exploit these human frailties (qualities?) but they never encounter quite the derision heaped upon this fine film. Strangely, enough, a most faithful interpretation of the book, just lacking the sticky claustrophobia of the original's interiors. Obviously this is disliked because of the way the 'incest' scenes are played but it is, as they say, only a film and this is not meant as a an advertisement but as an exploration. Worse things than this happen as we well know and to fall over ourselves to throw the first stone at a movie seems crazy. Especially if it has one of Stacy Keach's best performances, a great and most convincing one from Pia Zadora (who deserved her Golden Globe newcomer award) and at least an interesting late appearance from Orson Welles. Super cinematography, competent direction, fine score from Morricone and great steamy story. What's not to like?

Pia Zadora is the perfect sexy nymph. Ennio Morricone provides a score that rings a bell because it almost sounds like a"spaghetti western". Stacy Keach as the lusting daddy is fine, and Orson Wells comes across as a curiosity. The problem lies with the script. At first things take their time, introducing characters at a leisurely rate. There is a slow buildup but little idea where the movie is going. Then suddenly the pace quickens, and logic begins to fly out the window. In the end there are unresolved issues dangling uncomfortably, a ridiculous legal unwinding, and the viewer is left holding a very large bag of questions. Nudity does not a movie make, and "Butterfly", despite the titillating bathtub scene, is rather unsatisfying. - MERK

This is a movie that would have been good as the "B" film at the drive-in. You could tell from the beginning that it was a movie made for television. I worked extra on the set, and Orson Welles had a bottle of wine behind his podium as he did his judge shtick. He drank so much he would forget his lines, and he abused the cue card holders something fierce. After awhile, we ungrateful extras were yelling, "He will drink all wine before its time!" Cruel, but we were frustrated. Stacy Keach was a consummate professional, however. He acted as though the movie was "Citizen Kane." I have had great respect for him ever since.

I give this a graceful 8/10 because I 've watched so many crap films in my life that got 10/10 from all the morons at IMDb. This is a film that deals with incest in a crass way. But how does the rest of society deal with incest when at the very least about 1/70 girls are abused by members of their family in private? Not well at all, actually worse than in a crass way. So how do we expect a film about incest as a western to be? As freud said, it's the ultimate taboo. Pea is wonderful here, Orson is drinking his .. off and it shows, all in all a great movie not to be missed, but it will be, because it's not even out on DVD.