28 reviews
A car chase, a couple of machine gun fights, and long, long periods of boredom. Sorry but Barbara Broccoli is just not a patch on the quality and inventiveness her dad. By the end of a turgid more than 2 and a half hours plus I was actually rooting for Bond to die so I could get on and watch something better. Even Die Another Day was more entertaining than this.... every other Bond film is more entertaining than this. Miserable film to go with miserable times I suppose.
Bay had a great idea here. Let's take real life torturers and murderers and make a comedy about them killing people and cutting up their bodies. Fantastic. Maybe his next film will be a laugh about the Moor's murderers torturing and raping children, or maybe a cool comedy about the Nazi death camps. Distasteful does not describe the idea behind this if you know anything about the real crimes. How low does a sleaze bag of a director go to make money.
Just saw this on TV.
Amazed that almost the whole music score is a plagiarism of Hitchcock's Psycho score by the great Bernard Herrmann.
It sounds as if whole sections have just been lifted from the soundtrack album.
I'm amazed Southern Television got away with it, unless they paid a royalty.
Or maybe just thought they were too small and insignificant to anyone to find out?
All those violins were unmistakable.
Amazed that almost the whole music score is a plagiarism of Hitchcock's Psycho score by the great Bernard Herrmann.
It sounds as if whole sections have just been lifted from the soundtrack album.
I'm amazed Southern Television got away with it, unless they paid a royalty.
Or maybe just thought they were too small and insignificant to anyone to find out?
All those violins were unmistakable.
A very entertaining Columbo, with many exceptional comedy moments. Falk embarrassingly putting his cigar ashes in his pocket in an immaculate home. The lovely Joyce van Patten's nun mistaking him for a hobo after he is out all night and unshaven and more crumpled than usual. The hilarious Larry Storch as a super nervous driving instructor. I have only left 1 mark off just because Dick van Dyke is such a nice guy I can't take him seriously as a murderer, even with that unflattering beard, but that's just me. Falk's acting is faultless, picking up the dust on the clock on the mantelpiece etc. The final trick of unmasking the perpetrator is interesting and unusual. A treat.
to anyone who lived through these times and these types of factory settings this film resonates.
The Burke character of the communist agitator invokes criticism of left bashing but anyone who had experience of the British motor/engineering industry in these times knows that it is much closer to the truth than many people want to believe.
However to those that think the film has right wing bias you only have to look at how the useless fat cat directors are portrayed (having no knowledge of the business they are taking large salaries from), hardly an advertisement of capitalism. Plus even the "sympathetic" management end up not supporting the worker who supported them, as bad as the agitator in their own way.
Good performances all round, outstanding from Richard Attenborough, Pier Angeli, an unusually good turn by Michael Craig and dependable Bernard Lee as the dim union man manipulated easily by the agitator.
A style of film-making gone now but interesting social commentary of the times. Recommended for social historians and affectionados of good acting.
The Burke character of the communist agitator invokes criticism of left bashing but anyone who had experience of the British motor/engineering industry in these times knows that it is much closer to the truth than many people want to believe.
However to those that think the film has right wing bias you only have to look at how the useless fat cat directors are portrayed (having no knowledge of the business they are taking large salaries from), hardly an advertisement of capitalism. Plus even the "sympathetic" management end up not supporting the worker who supported them, as bad as the agitator in their own way.
Good performances all round, outstanding from Richard Attenborough, Pier Angeli, an unusually good turn by Michael Craig and dependable Bernard Lee as the dim union man manipulated easily by the agitator.
A style of film-making gone now but interesting social commentary of the times. Recommended for social historians and affectionados of good acting.
maybe my favourite Columbo and maybe the best too.
Just look at McGoohans eyes behind that stiff and unyielding exterior, particularly in the one scene where he unbends a little in the office interview with the Lieutenant. No wonder he won the Emmy for this performance.
The contrast in his style with Falks is the highlight of this episode, no wonder they became good friends with many invitations to come back as yet another murderer and also to direct. They bounce off each other superbly taking an already high quality TV series into new realms.
Highly recommended.
Just look at McGoohans eyes behind that stiff and unyielding exterior, particularly in the one scene where he unbends a little in the office interview with the Lieutenant. No wonder he won the Emmy for this performance.
The contrast in his style with Falks is the highlight of this episode, no wonder they became good friends with many invitations to come back as yet another murderer and also to direct. They bounce off each other superbly taking an already high quality TV series into new realms.
Highly recommended.
question: how do you steal a scene from the expert of expert scene stealers Walther Mathau in full, furious and brilliant Grumpy Old Man mode? answer: quietly, deadpan, and with perfect timing as George Burns does here.
I know nothing of Vaudeville but this remains a favourite film, the two leads are hilarious, the script funny, the direction and pacing very fine. Richard Benjamin is very funny as straight man - trying to get at Burns through the window etc. Even the small parts are great.
There are so many funny scenes, Mathau messing up the commercial, Burns repeating his answers as if senile...
A delight.
Enterrrrrr!
I know nothing of Vaudeville but this remains a favourite film, the two leads are hilarious, the script funny, the direction and pacing very fine. Richard Benjamin is very funny as straight man - trying to get at Burns through the window etc. Even the small parts are great.
There are so many funny scenes, Mathau messing up the commercial, Burns repeating his answers as if senile...
A delight.
Enterrrrrr!
Connery is far too old for this kind of caper, even if this were some kind of acceptable entertainment that did not completely waste 2 hours of your life. The scenes of this 70 year old man fighting and "running" to avoid a hail of fire from multiple heavy machine guns were just laughable, having to be cut every 1/2 second because without the editing it would look ridiculous - even with the editing it looked ridiculous. I mention this because did not see it mentioned anywhere else here where the other aspects of this disgraceful production are well documented and entertainingly described with far better imagination than anything shown by the film-makers. One to rank with Connery in 'The Avengers' as a complete waste of everybody's time, talented actors, and audiences shown no respect for the ticket money they've shelled out.
A fine, fine film from Sam Peckinpah. One of my favourites from the first time I saw it, the ending is very effective and one of the greatest scenes in Westerns in its simplicity yet emotional punch.
I really honestly cannot think of a bad performance in this film. The evil Hammond brothers are all truly excellent, though the Virginian takes some getting used to as baddie, R G Armstrong is suitably weird as the religious/anti-sex obsessed father. Hartley is beautiful and excellent in the role. Starr is gauche, but that is required of the character so it works OK. The madam is suitably horrid and Buchanan as the drunk judge is even better than his usual scene stealing performances.
But Scott and McRea are a revelation - a kind of B picture version of the Duke in the Shootist, but this is B picture only in budget, in quality terms it is A+++ through and through. Both of their performances are spot on all the way, you truly believe the standards of the mythical west lived in guys like this, putting honour above all else.
So the proof that you don't need a mega budget to make a great, great film, and that age and experience count for an awful lot when these 2 great cowboy stars get together and show us what they are capable of after a lifetime of film making.
"Go now Gil... I don't want the young un's to see this"
"Ok Partner... I'll see you later"
Superb and memorable...
I really honestly cannot think of a bad performance in this film. The evil Hammond brothers are all truly excellent, though the Virginian takes some getting used to as baddie, R G Armstrong is suitably weird as the religious/anti-sex obsessed father. Hartley is beautiful and excellent in the role. Starr is gauche, but that is required of the character so it works OK. The madam is suitably horrid and Buchanan as the drunk judge is even better than his usual scene stealing performances.
But Scott and McRea are a revelation - a kind of B picture version of the Duke in the Shootist, but this is B picture only in budget, in quality terms it is A+++ through and through. Both of their performances are spot on all the way, you truly believe the standards of the mythical west lived in guys like this, putting honour above all else.
So the proof that you don't need a mega budget to make a great, great film, and that age and experience count for an awful lot when these 2 great cowboy stars get together and show us what they are capable of after a lifetime of film making.
"Go now Gil... I don't want the young un's to see this"
"Ok Partner... I'll see you later"
Superb and memorable...
this is sort of OK as an afternoon TV movie but stands no comparison against the Oscar nominated and winning original.
The Cukor version has class written all over it with stupendous performances from Broderick Crawford, Judy Holiday and William Holden, great comic timing and real pace.
This is just ambling along, making the motions, insipid in comparison, the famous gin rummy scene is a bit embarrassing really. John Goodman can't make his mind up whether he wants to be a bully or sympathetic, his pest controller in Anachrophobia was a far better comic performance I think. Don Johnson is so low key he seems to be sleepwalking through the role. Melenie Griffith was far better in Working Girl with an all round superior character transformation. So maybe the script and especially direction have to take the blame to a greater degree.
Cheap off-cut compared to prime rump steak.
The Cukor version has class written all over it with stupendous performances from Broderick Crawford, Judy Holiday and William Holden, great comic timing and real pace.
This is just ambling along, making the motions, insipid in comparison, the famous gin rummy scene is a bit embarrassing really. John Goodman can't make his mind up whether he wants to be a bully or sympathetic, his pest controller in Anachrophobia was a far better comic performance I think. Don Johnson is so low key he seems to be sleepwalking through the role. Melenie Griffith was far better in Working Girl with an all round superior character transformation. So maybe the script and especially direction have to take the blame to a greater degree.
Cheap off-cut compared to prime rump steak.
an interesting curio as Chaplin's last film. Loren is ravishingly beautiful and carries the whole film well on her shoulders. Brando badly miscast, he shows some great timing in the madcap farce rushing around scenes, but try to imagine how Rex Harrison could have done this type of slamming doors and hiding farce as the uptight diplomat exasperated with his stowaway - think My Fair Lady. Brando's mumbling performance just does not gel. Apparently he had disagreements with Chaplin and maybe was sulking.
Very nice cameos from Margaret Rutherford (British films of the 50s Miss Marple) and Angelar Scoular (batty girl like in her performance in On Her Majesty's Secret Service), also great comedy performance from Patrick Cargill (British TV comedy and a memorable No 2 in the Prisoner) as the butler. Excellent acting going on here.
It is dull to start with, static camera like silent films, stagy, and obvious studio sets, but by the time the sea sickness scene came along I was laughing and drawn in. The post marriage bedroom scene is funny.
There is a scene at the bar with Sydney Chaplin (Charlie's son) where he tries to distract Michael Medwin, where Sydney looks amazingly like Charlie in attitude and timing - but this is probably due to diligent direction by his father.
A really nice theme music from Charlie again. Yes, it is old fashioned, a filmed play, was absolutely released in the wrong decade, with the wrong leading man, but does show some of the Chaplin traits and even perhaps genius, certainly his humanist philosophy in the treatment of homeless or stateless persons.
A real shame it was so savaged by critics at the time and disappointed him in his old age. He deserved better for his lifetime contribution to the art of film.
Very nice cameos from Margaret Rutherford (British films of the 50s Miss Marple) and Angelar Scoular (batty girl like in her performance in On Her Majesty's Secret Service), also great comedy performance from Patrick Cargill (British TV comedy and a memorable No 2 in the Prisoner) as the butler. Excellent acting going on here.
It is dull to start with, static camera like silent films, stagy, and obvious studio sets, but by the time the sea sickness scene came along I was laughing and drawn in. The post marriage bedroom scene is funny.
There is a scene at the bar with Sydney Chaplin (Charlie's son) where he tries to distract Michael Medwin, where Sydney looks amazingly like Charlie in attitude and timing - but this is probably due to diligent direction by his father.
A really nice theme music from Charlie again. Yes, it is old fashioned, a filmed play, was absolutely released in the wrong decade, with the wrong leading man, but does show some of the Chaplin traits and even perhaps genius, certainly his humanist philosophy in the treatment of homeless or stateless persons.
A real shame it was so savaged by critics at the time and disappointed him in his old age. He deserved better for his lifetime contribution to the art of film.
I was pulled into this movie, despite a clichéd and standard TV movie type script. This was probably due to the performances and good recreation of the times.
Sean Hayes does not look like Jerry Lewis but made a good stab at recreating his manic energy and routines. Only in the dramatic scenes did I feel a lack of insight in his performance.
Jeremy Northam convinced admirably with his laid back Dean Martin, unfortunately he had little material to work with script wise but got across Dino's couldn't care less attitude which rolled along for years with Lewis until he could take no more.
I think the fault with the movie was that it was made when only one of the duo has passed on, so perhaps there were Lewis traits that had to be down graded at the expense of Martin. However to be fair they did show some of Lewis's control freakery and joke stealing that led to the final breakup.
Still for a TV movie it was definitely above average, these 2 stars were huge successes in their partnership days, and each went on to show their own brand of showbiz genius as they went their separate ways afterwards. In the end a rather sad story.
Sean Hayes does not look like Jerry Lewis but made a good stab at recreating his manic energy and routines. Only in the dramatic scenes did I feel a lack of insight in his performance.
Jeremy Northam convinced admirably with his laid back Dean Martin, unfortunately he had little material to work with script wise but got across Dino's couldn't care less attitude which rolled along for years with Lewis until he could take no more.
I think the fault with the movie was that it was made when only one of the duo has passed on, so perhaps there were Lewis traits that had to be down graded at the expense of Martin. However to be fair they did show some of Lewis's control freakery and joke stealing that led to the final breakup.
Still for a TV movie it was definitely above average, these 2 stars were huge successes in their partnership days, and each went on to show their own brand of showbiz genius as they went their separate ways afterwards. In the end a rather sad story.
Blake Edwards did not get on with Peter Sellers, and they only came together again many years after Shot In The Dark when both needed the money and boost to their flagging careers. Since then in the documentaries Edwards had tried to puff up his importance to the films, obviously without being able to trash Sellers too much since after his passing it would not be good PR.
If ever there was proof needed that the Panther franchise depended entirely on Sellers genius it is the films that Edwards produced in the Clouseau series without Sellers, basically they are the leaden dross to the varying purity of gold that the films with Sellers were.
Trail was great for the first half hour because Sellers' outtakes were in it. The next half hour was a waste of time for us who had seen the other films since it was just clips we had all seen before. The last half hour was a waste of time period.
This Curse film was a complete waste of time apart from a few minutes at the end when Roger Moore gives lessons to Ted Wass (an actor who has disappeared into the the obscurity he well deserves) in exactly what comic timing and flair really is, and provides more smiles in a few seconds than has been forthcoming in the rest of the entire movie.
A travesty by Blake Edwards which proves just how little his contribution was to the franchise (without Sellers there to bail him out) and how low Hollywood can stoop in the quest to wring the last cents out of a franchise and spoil the pleasant and nostalgic memories of the great and funny earlier films.
Not worth rating.
If ever there was proof needed that the Panther franchise depended entirely on Sellers genius it is the films that Edwards produced in the Clouseau series without Sellers, basically they are the leaden dross to the varying purity of gold that the films with Sellers were.
Trail was great for the first half hour because Sellers' outtakes were in it. The next half hour was a waste of time for us who had seen the other films since it was just clips we had all seen before. The last half hour was a waste of time period.
This Curse film was a complete waste of time apart from a few minutes at the end when Roger Moore gives lessons to Ted Wass (an actor who has disappeared into the the obscurity he well deserves) in exactly what comic timing and flair really is, and provides more smiles in a few seconds than has been forthcoming in the rest of the entire movie.
A travesty by Blake Edwards which proves just how little his contribution was to the franchise (without Sellers there to bail him out) and how low Hollywood can stoop in the quest to wring the last cents out of a franchise and spoil the pleasant and nostalgic memories of the great and funny earlier films.
Not worth rating.
I've watched this a couple of times now and it gets worse the more you analyse. Compare it to the episode in Mexico where as a "fish out of water" Columbo has to help the local police. That episode is tightly scripted with a believable Mexican policeman and reason for Columbo to help out. Here we have lazy scriptwriting (exchnage visit) and cartoon English policemen going to their "clubs". Laughable! The theatre setting and "luvie" murderers have possibilities but marred by Basehart's Canadian drawl. The pub scene with "cockneys" is just ludicrous. The difference between the location shoot and the Californian and studio scenes is glaring and off putting.
The problem is Falk is not on camera enough to lift it, and a wealth of British character actors are wasted with not enough nuance in the script, and no interesting villain like Patrick MacGoohan, Jack Cassidy or Robert Culp to mask the story shortfalls with screen presence. The murder and denouement is just lame and it is surprising this episode came so early since it bears all the hallmarks of the type of episode you get when the series is going down the drain and a desperate attempt is made to liven the pattern up with a new location. Columbo has done far better than this, but I must admit that compared to more standard TV fare a bad Columbo is still better than a lot of other things you can pass the time with because Peter Falk is in it.
The problem is Falk is not on camera enough to lift it, and a wealth of British character actors are wasted with not enough nuance in the script, and no interesting villain like Patrick MacGoohan, Jack Cassidy or Robert Culp to mask the story shortfalls with screen presence. The murder and denouement is just lame and it is surprising this episode came so early since it bears all the hallmarks of the type of episode you get when the series is going down the drain and a desperate attempt is made to liven the pattern up with a new location. Columbo has done far better than this, but I must admit that compared to more standard TV fare a bad Columbo is still better than a lot of other things you can pass the time with because Peter Falk is in it.
caught this on TV last night. Second time around for me, the first time this film had a great effect on me personally. I survived a close workplace explosion many years ago and remember vividly to this day the unreal feeling going home on bus and train as if walking on air in slow motion while the whole world around me carried on bustling by as normal.
Weir again surpasses himself judged against his Truman Show and Witness standards of excellence, what an interesting film maker he is.
Bridges has never been better, if you think his comedy performance in Lebowski is magnificent you should check out his drama performance here.
Rossellini looks ravishing and delivers a wonderful and subtle performance.
Perez does very well interpreting a difficult role of an ordinary someone not too bright (as Del Toro does also doubled) trying to understand what is happening around her.
Hulce does a lovely comedy turn as the archetypal ambulance chasing lawyer.
Turtturo does a fine underplayed turn as the company hired doctor engendering sympathy.
Even the child actors do very well, obviously everything clicked in this film in what is a very difficult subject matter to get across.
This is an art film for adults, a film that looks at the meaning of existence, the journey from life to death, the randomness of chance accidents, the "bullet with your name on it", religion, atheism, the value of psycho therapy, the pain of loss, coming to terms with the insignificance of individual life in a huge universe, and the value of relationships.
It can have the same type of emotional effect as reading The Catcher In the Rye when an adolescent... if you know what I mean... you will know what I mean.
Weir again surpasses himself judged against his Truman Show and Witness standards of excellence, what an interesting film maker he is.
Bridges has never been better, if you think his comedy performance in Lebowski is magnificent you should check out his drama performance here.
Rossellini looks ravishing and delivers a wonderful and subtle performance.
Perez does very well interpreting a difficult role of an ordinary someone not too bright (as Del Toro does also doubled) trying to understand what is happening around her.
Hulce does a lovely comedy turn as the archetypal ambulance chasing lawyer.
Turtturo does a fine underplayed turn as the company hired doctor engendering sympathy.
Even the child actors do very well, obviously everything clicked in this film in what is a very difficult subject matter to get across.
This is an art film for adults, a film that looks at the meaning of existence, the journey from life to death, the randomness of chance accidents, the "bullet with your name on it", religion, atheism, the value of psycho therapy, the pain of loss, coming to terms with the insignificance of individual life in a huge universe, and the value of relationships.
It can have the same type of emotional effect as reading The Catcher In the Rye when an adolescent... if you know what I mean... you will know what I mean.
just caught this thoughtful film on TV again.
not a particular Mitchum fan, but here he is gives a wonderful world weary performance as the "outside man" gradually learning kindness and companionship and friendship against the odds of his upbringing and circumstances and the hand that fate has dealt him.
Not a particular shoot em up type western but a film about belonging and extricating yourself from a bad lot when down a blind alley. Just watch as he reacts to the little kindnesses as he recovers from his injury or the final scene with his beloved horse, lovely low key acting.
Beautiful photography too. Passes a lazy afternoon very nicely.
not a particular Mitchum fan, but here he is gives a wonderful world weary performance as the "outside man" gradually learning kindness and companionship and friendship against the odds of his upbringing and circumstances and the hand that fate has dealt him.
Not a particular shoot em up type western but a film about belonging and extricating yourself from a bad lot when down a blind alley. Just watch as he reacts to the little kindnesses as he recovers from his injury or the final scene with his beloved horse, lovely low key acting.
Beautiful photography too. Passes a lazy afternoon very nicely.
I looked forward to this film after a good review in the Sunday Times magazine and enjoying the Ring films.
What the hell do they pay these reviewers for? to get it SOOO.. wrong.
This is a train wreck of a film, a pointless stretching out of the original. The 1933 drags while getting to Kong, this one you can grow a beard before anything happens, with no reason for the time spent, no character development, you don't really care who lives and dies after all the chit chat, and half of them disappear with no logic or explanation anyway, never having seen what happened to them.
The plot absurdities are too numerous to mention, and have been documented well by other reviews here, a children's film script written for a 3 year old, by scriptwriters with a mental age of 5 years old.
Watch the original for a cheesy but truly awe inspiring film taking into account the year it was made and the technical limitations it was made under, with at least some pace to it.
Watch this to see how today, Hollywood, with all the cgi and electronic wizardry available, can waste a couple of hundred million dollars on something with no artistic merit whatsoever, and residual entertainment value that could fit into 10 minutes.
Some directors have talent, and with no budget or a poor script can still fashion a good film. Jackson is obviously not one of these, he was just lucky with his collaborators on the Ring trilogy, and has now gone off the rails spectacularly with this one. All his talk of the original being his favourite and inspiration only makes your jaw drop further to the floor as to how he could have seen this in the editing suite and thought he had a good film ready to be released.
Sad, sad, sad.
What the hell do they pay these reviewers for? to get it SOOO.. wrong.
This is a train wreck of a film, a pointless stretching out of the original. The 1933 drags while getting to Kong, this one you can grow a beard before anything happens, with no reason for the time spent, no character development, you don't really care who lives and dies after all the chit chat, and half of them disappear with no logic or explanation anyway, never having seen what happened to them.
The plot absurdities are too numerous to mention, and have been documented well by other reviews here, a children's film script written for a 3 year old, by scriptwriters with a mental age of 5 years old.
Watch the original for a cheesy but truly awe inspiring film taking into account the year it was made and the technical limitations it was made under, with at least some pace to it.
Watch this to see how today, Hollywood, with all the cgi and electronic wizardry available, can waste a couple of hundred million dollars on something with no artistic merit whatsoever, and residual entertainment value that could fit into 10 minutes.
Some directors have talent, and with no budget or a poor script can still fashion a good film. Jackson is obviously not one of these, he was just lucky with his collaborators on the Ring trilogy, and has now gone off the rails spectacularly with this one. All his talk of the original being his favourite and inspiration only makes your jaw drop further to the floor as to how he could have seen this in the editing suite and thought he had a good film ready to be released.
Sad, sad, sad.