Category Archives: 70’s Movies

Zig Zag (1970)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 5 out of 10

4-Word Review: Framing yourself isn’t good.

            Paul Cameron (George Kennedy) is an insurance agent and family man who learns that he is dying from a brain tumor and has only a few months to live. In order to provide money for his wife and children he sets himself up as the kidnapper of a wealthy businessman in an unsolved case that offered a $225,000 reward for anyone leading to the conviction of the culprit. After he is found guilty at his trial he faints and the doctors there decide to do experimental laser surgery to remove the tumor. The operation proves to be a success forcing Paul to go on a battle to prove his innocence, or risk spending the rest of his life in jail for a crime he did not commit.

Although he has done well in supporting roles Kennedy proves to be quite weak as a leading man as he shows almost no emotion in any of his scenes. When he is told of his tumor he takes it in a very matter-of-fact way without getting upset at all, which seemed unrealistic. His performance is dull and the few times that he does get upset it comes off as forced. His presence hurts the film and a more engaging, eccentric actor could’ve made it more interesting.

Eli Wallach as Paul’s attorney is terrific and the one thing that injects some energy. He is dynamic throughout and is fun to watch even during the slow parts. It was nice to see him doing a scene with his real-life wife Anne Jackson. As of this writing the two have now been married for 64 years, which has to be one of the longest marriages in Hollywood history.

The supporting cast features a long list of familiar character actors making it like spot-the-star. They include: Dana Elcar, Douglas Henderson, Steve Ihnat, William Marshall, Joan Tompkins, Robert Sampson, Leonard Stone, and Walter Brooke in an interesting duplicitous part.

Richard A. Colla’s direction is impressive. The film opens with a diverting cinema verite-style scene showing Paul going through the examination process before entering the prison, which seems unusually elaborate touch for what is otherwise just a gimmicky script. Another innovative part is when Paul is shown planting evidence at the scene of the crime and only the sounds and ambiance of the locale is heard without any music, which is more effective.  Unfortunately the direction and story become much more conventional towards the middle and it is not as interesting. The film tries to be too many things and does not come together as a seamless whole. The courtroom scenes were too extended for my tastes as we know Paul is innocent, but wants to be convicted anyways, so his many prolonged conversations with his exasperated lawyer who does not know of his scheme seem rather pointless. However, when Paul is cured and then goes on a mission to find the real killer it becomes exciting as the mystery itself proves to be complex and intriguing.

The twist ending did not go over well with audiences at the time of the film’s initial release. It’s a downer for sure, but after seeing so many tacky happy Hollywood endings in my lifetime I can’t say I totally hated it. As a budding screenwriter I enjoy irony and the ending here certainly has that. It’s slickly handled and although I saw it coming others may be genuinely surprised by it. My only complaint is that it’s a bit abrupt and could’ve and should’ve been extended in some way, or given a more effective closure.

If you like a movie with a lot of twists then this film may be worth seeking out. The legendary Roy Orbison sings the title tune during a party scene and it sounds like some of his best stuff. I am surprised it didn’t chart and I wished they had allowed the viewer to hear the complete son before cutting away.

My Rating: 5 out of 10

Released: September 11, 1970

Runtime: 1Hour 45Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Richard A. Colla

Studio: MGM

Available: VHS (as False Witness), DVD (Warner Archive) 

Salo, or the 120 Days of Sodom (1975)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 5 out of 10

4-Word Review: They want sex slaves.

During the end of WW II in a northern city of occupied Italy a group of bourgeoisie men and women round up a group of teenage boys and girls and take them to an isolated mansion where they are forced to become sex slaves. They are also inflicted with cruel tortures in this story based on the writings of Marquis De Sade.

The film is interesting, but only up to a point. Director Pasolini’s natural lighting fetish really works here and he makes it into an art form. His ability to find the perfect moment in the day to shoot the scene and be able to frame the action within the shadows is amazing and along with the color schemes gives it a very distinctive look and an unusual atmosphere.

The acting by the adults is amazing as they project evilness without flaw. The perverted stories they tell in some ways is more shocking than the actual scenes and the casual way they go about their sick behavior achieves an unprecedented level.

The story itself has some good insights. It shows the veneer of civilized behavior and how the passive nature of the victims and society as a whole only helps to allow evil to flourish. There’s also the main point which is that evil is truly a part of the human make-up and hides itself in everybody and can come out if provoked including the victims themselves.

Yet the film makes its point and then hammers it home without pause. The non-stop perversity becomes excessive and the redundancy eventually makes the shock value and message meaningless. Showing the background of these captors might have helped given it more of a balance.

I have nothing against those who wish to ‘push the envelope’ and there is nothing that says movies need to be tasteful, or even entertaining, but I couldn’t help but wonder if Pasolini simply used the material as an excuse to explore his own dark fantasies. Of course DeSade’s actual writings were far more twisted and unsettling then anything you see here and the film is a significantly toned down version.

Actual teenagers were used and there is an abundance of nudity and perversity. Something like this could never have been made here in the states and exactly how it ever got made is more interesting than the film itself. If there was ever a movie begging for a “Making of…” documentary it’s this one. It is also interesting to note that Pasolini was mysteriously killed by a hit-and-run driver just a few days before the film’s official release.

My Rating: 5 out of 10

Released: November 22, 1975

Runtime: 1Hour 56Minutes

Rated NC-17

Director: Pier Paolo Pasolini

Studio: United Artists

Available: DVD, Blu-ray (The Criterion Collection)

Convoy (1978)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 3 out of 10

4-Word Review: The song is better.

Trucker Martin ‘Rubber Duck’ Penwald (Kris Kristofferson) battles corrupt Sheriff Lyle ‘Cottonmouth’ Wallace (Ernest Borgnine) by getting his fellow truckers to band together and form an unstoppable convoy that stretches for miles and soon creates a national media frenzy.

The film’s setup is weak and the ending even weaker. It has all the good-ole-boy/trucker clichés without adding anything new in the process and makes Smokey and the Bandit look brilliant and inspired. Kristofferson is much too laid back for a leading man role and cannot carry the picture. Borgnine’s character is portrayed awkwardly. At the start he is made to look like a real jerk of a sheriff who overacts to a minor contrivance that starts the whole thing rolling. Then at the end he turns more sympathetic and even secretly sides with Kristofferson, which doesn’t work at all. In either case Jackie Gleason is a much better actor for this type of role. The worst part about the movie though is director Sam Peckinpah’s attempts to throw in a ‘serious message’ into this silly action flick that does nothing but slow it down and bomb in the process.

The only good scene in the whole film is the fight sequence inside the truck stop restaurant. Peckinpah puts a funny spin to his trademark ‘slow motion’ violence and the result is amusing. Unfortunately he starts putting all the action into slow motion, which eventually becomes tiring. Ali McGraw as Melissa an attractive woman Martin picks up along the way is always a pleasure to look at, but unfortunately she is given very little to say or do.

If you’ve read the synopsis then you have essentially ‘seen’ the movie. The hit song by C.W. McCall that this movie is based on is pretty good and I would suggest listening to that instead and saving yourself 108 minutes of your time. This is all shockingly uninspired stuff for such an otherwise maverick director.

My Rating: 3 out of 10

Released: June 28, 1978

Runtime: 1Hour 50Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Sam Peckinpah

Studio: United Artists

Available: VHS, DVD, Amazon Instant Video

Heavy Traffic (1973)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 6 out of 10

4-Word Review: A world without women.

            Animated feature with some live-action scenes dealing with a lonely 24 year old artist named Michael who is still living with his parents in a rundown New York City apartment and aspires to be an underground cartoonist.

The film seems compelled right from the beginning to shock and offend as many viewers as it can. Violence and blood, lots of blood, seems to spurt out of characters heads and bodies every few minutes. Breasts pop out of female dresses with just as much regularity and there is even a segment dealing with spousal abuse that gets rather nasty.  Racial stereotypes abound and the N-word is used liberally by the white characters. Some may consider this groundbreaking while others might think it was done by someone who has been sitting alone in his studio too long and needs to seek professional help.  I can appreciate the no-holed-barred approach and the idea that cartoons don’t have to be just for kids, but the edginess is no longer as potent these days since Family Guy, American Dad, and South Park come quite close to what you see here and in some ways are even more outrageous.

The story is too free-form and lacks focus. It took quite a while before I could get into it and the beginning comes off like a lot torrid, wild images thrown at you without cohesion, or direction. The characters are vulgar, gross, and unlikable. Michael, as the protagonist, as some appeal, but he is too detached.

There were some scenes that I found to be quite funny, but they all come in the second half. The scene where Michael describes a new fantasy comic he wants to create to a very sickly, old publisher is great and nicely symbolizes how the old guard is out of touch with the tastes and ideas of the younger generation. His idea deals with an apocalyptic world that has no women, so the men have sex with a pile of garbage instead only to have a real woman appear and then be taken away by God who wants her for himself. This sequence is by far the funniest and most imaginatively perverse of the whole film and I wished that this had been the main premise.  Another segment has Michael’s father bringing home an obese prostitute for Michael, which in a gross sort of way is highly amusing. Another similar scene has Michael trying to have sex with another woman on the rooftop of a building, but inadvertently knocks her over the side wall and she spends the rest of the film dangling naked by a telephone wire. The Godfather who eats a hearty meal of spaghetti while in front of a row of urinals deserves mention as well.

The film is certainly not for all tastes. The animation may not hold up to today’ s standards and the live action segments are not as interesting. The ending falls flat and gets extended longer than it should. Supposedly the initial idea was to have it end with a climatic car chase with images of penny arcade pinball machines flashed across the sky, which would have been better, but due to budget restraints was scrapped.

My Rating: 6 out of 10

Released: August 8, 1973

Runtime: 1Hour 17Minutes

Rated R

Director: Ralph Bakshi

Studio: American International Pictures

Available: VHS, DVD

Dirty Hands (1975)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 7 out of 10

4-Word Review: Their plans go awry.

Julie Wormser (Romy Schneider) is married to Louis (Rod Steiger) who is rich, but also 18 years older and suffering from impotency. A young, virile man by the name of Jeff Marle (Paolo Giusti) comes into her life and the two become lovers. They conspire to murder her husband and run off. However, their elaborate plan quickly unravels leading to many unexpected twists and turns.

Story-wise this is one of the better Hitchcock imitations. There are a lot of twists that are interesting and surprising. They are also well-explained and make sense. Nothing is thrown in that is implausible or creates loopholes.  The script is like traveling on a curving, winding road in a fast car and I found myself delightfully surprised, intrigued, and entertained with each new revelation. The film takes its time in explaining each detail and plot point. I liked how the investigators are given almost as much screen time as the culprits and writer/director Claude Chabrol has everything well-thought out and even manages to get you to care for these people at the end.

Schneider is stunning. I loved her blonde tinted hair and chic outfits. She has a sultry nude scene at the very beginning, but it is only from the backside. This was pretty much her vehicle. Her character goes through a wide-range of emotions and she does a great job of conveying each one. Her facial expressions especially as the case unravels and she is being interrogated by the Judge and questioned by her lawyer are captivating to watch and perfectly realized.

Steiger is always fun. His ability to display raw intense emotion is second to none. The character was a bit cardboard as written, but Steiger manages to make him human and I had genuine sympathy for him towards the end. He does tend to border on over-acting at times, but he injects life into the scenes that otherwise could have gotten boring and slow.

Although Chabrol clearly put a lot of care into the script the visual element is lacking. The camera work is conventional and unimaginative. Certain scenes are too dark and shadowy while others look bright and splotchy. The majority takes place in an exquisite looking French Chateau, but Chabrol fails to take advantage of this. The lack of visual style makes the thing look almost amateurish and the grainy, faded DVD transfer does not help. I also felt the dialogue between the two investigators seemed stale and derivative. There was also a part were Julie complains to the investigators that they have dropped into her house for a visit at much too late an hour and then, only a minute later, she is seen walking out of her house and it is broad daylight. Also, when she hits her husband over the head and supposedly kills him in his sleep he is still seen breathing.

If one is looking for a sharp mystery done in the Columbo style then this pick could be a fun, escapist evening. Schneider’s beauty and acting will carry the rest, but just be prepared for production values that are on a TV-movie level.

My Rating: 7 out of 10

Released: March 26, 1975

Runtime: 2Hours 1Minute

Rated PG

Director: Claude Chabrol

Studio: New Line Cinema

Available: DVD

Fore Play (1975)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 1 out of 10

4-Word Review: This sex goes limp.

This is a boring, flat, and completely disastrous attempt at sex comedy. This is the type of teaser T & A picture that gives all other T & A pictures a bad name. Out of the entire running time there is less than a minute of any actual nudity. The sex jokes are stupid and a child could watch this and not be overly shocked. It also looks like it was meshed together on the smallest of budgets.

The film is structured much like a horror anthology with three different stories all based on the same theme in this case sex. The first one features comedian Pat Paulsen as a lonely man who buys a realistic looking sex doll (Deborah Loomis). The doll is supposed to be Polish, but her accent sound more like it is Swedish. This segment is somewhat interesting because Paulsen plays against type here. He is much more emotional and hostile. He even ends up swearing at his own mother (Sudie Bond). There is also an amusing bit of seeing him trying to get the doll, with her stiff arms and legs, into a taxi cab. However the segment goes by too fast and the ending is really stupid. Paulsen also sings here and it sounds as bad as you might expect.

The second segment features Jerry Orbach as a writer going through writer’s block. Here you see the film’s one and only offensive sight, which is having to witness George S Irving in a bikini bottom. He plays Orbach’s muse and takes him back into time to reverse certain sexual conquests that he initially bombed at. One amusing bit has him in a game where he must undress a beautiful lady in sixty seconds in order to have sex with her. He does only to find that she is frigid. Like with the first segment this one also has a really stupid ending.

The third and final story sounds like a winner, but fails terribly. It consists of Zero Mostel as the President whose daughter is kidnapped. As ransom he is forced to have sex with his wife (Estelle Parsons) on national television, which ends up being incredibly dull and unsexy. The only amusing bit, and it is a very brief one, is when one of the secret service agents has to frisk the first lady before she is allowed to hug her husband. Both Parsons and Mostel play dual roles neither of which is funny.

The film is sleep inducing. Although many sources list it with a very brief running time it ran a full 90 minutes on the print I saw, which of course only means more minutes of boredom.

My Rating: 1 out of 10

Released: March 24, 1975

Runtime: 1Hour 30Minutes

Rated R

Directors: John G. Avildsen, Bruce Malmuth, Robert McCarty

Studio: Cinema National

Available: DVD (Troma)

The Offence (1972)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 8 out of 10

4-Word Review: Interrogate the child molestor.

Well respected, longtime police detective Johnson (Sean Connery) becomes so burned-out by all the sickening crimes that he has seen through his career that he snaps during the interrogation of a suspected child molester (Ian Bannen) and ends up beating the man to death.

Based on the stage play by John Hopkins this film has lots and lots of talking and some may say there is too much of it. The script is split into three drawn out conversations between two people. One is between Johnson and the suspect, the second is between Johnson and his wife (Vivien Merchant), and the third is between Johnson and the man brought in to investigate the incident, which is played by Trevor Howard. By the end even the most patient viewer may feel a bit talked out and it gets especially trying when you realize that the same issues are being discussed over and over again.

Yet that is not to say that this is a poor film as the visual element is excellent. In many ways you can appreciate the production for its visual style alone. Director Sidney Lumet displays a good handle on the material and it’s technically sharp on all levels. The lighting is well composed with the center that is bright, but the corners that are shadowy much like the human psyche and society. The overall grayness helps bring out the depression and isolation of the main character. The pacing is slow, but deliberate. Each scene builds to an intense crescendo. The music soundtrack resembles that of a one tone alarm that keeps building to a higher pitch much like the alarm ready to go off in Johnson’s head. The character’s inner tension is made even more vivid by Lumet’s use of interposing the bright light of the interrogation room over the screen. It is hard to imagine this film being any better crafted and it is a terrific training tool for the inspiring filmmaker.

Despite being talky the script in itself isn’t bad as it makes you aware of the ugly side of police work. It focuses not on the system or corruption, like a lot of other police films, but more on the actual work itself. It questions whether someone who is bombarded with the daily gore and societal sickness can remain sane and whether ‘leaving it all at the office’ is even possible. Every officer may eventually suffer scars from his job experience.

In a way this may be Connery’s best role. He shows his usual tough exterior, but also has moments where he unravels into a helpless, scared man. Bannen does an equally good job as the suspect. You are never really sure if he is guilty or not. The fact that he gives off a leering grin even after being beaten gives this film an added edge.

This is an oppressive and unrelenting movie filled with stark and unpleasant imagery that may stay with you long after it is over. Yet it is also expertly crafted and brings up some serious and important issues that are as timely today as they were back then.

My Rating: 8 out of 10

Released: January 11, 1972

Runtime: 1Hour 52Minutes

Rated R (Mature Theme)

Director: Sidney Lumet

Studio: MGM

Available: VHS, DVD (Region 1 and 2), Amazon Instant Video

Jeremiah Johnson (1972)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 6 out of 10

4-Word Review: Man in the wilderness.

            Jeremiah Johnson (Robert Redford) is a man who wishes to live life alone in the snowy mountains. His peaceful existence comes to an end when after riding through a sacred burial ground of the Crow Indian he becomes the target of young male warriors who attack him one-by-one when he is not expecting it to avenge his ‘desecration’. Jeremiah manages to defeat every warrior that challenges him turning him into a legend among the native tribes.

The film’s on-location shooting is outstanding and one of the chief assets in watching the movie. It was shot entirely in the state of Utah and there are many majestic long-shots where all you hear is the wind blowing and makes you feel like you are outdoors yourself alongside the character. The barren, empty winter landscape is well captured and while watching Jeremiah trudge all alone through the snow it was hard for me to imagine that there was actually a film crew present. The ambience of the natural surroundings is breathtaking and grabbed me immediately. I enjoyed the slow, quiet pace at the beginning and wished there had been more of it. One of the most enjoyable scenes is watching Jeremiah trying to catch fish with his hands out of a river, which could have been more entertaining had it been extended.

The story is loosely based on the real life exploits of fur trapper John Johnston who was known to cut out and eat the liver of every crow warrior that he defeated. There is nothing like that here and in some ways that is part of the problem. The ruggedness and reality seem to have been compromised by 70’s sensibilities with too many quirky scenarios and characters thrown in making the film’s structure reminiscent to Little Big Man, which was released just a few years earlier. That film seemed refreshingly cerebral, but here it becomes imitative and derivative.

Robert Redford is high in the looks department, but so-so in acting. He has always had too much of a detached presence and his range of emotions is limited. In some films this may work, but here the part needed more charisma and flair. The character was more like a modern day, touchy-feely male transplanted from Hollywood and into the wild than an actual 18th century hermit. For a man living off the land far from civilization he has to have the whitest most straightest teeth I have ever seen.

The supporting cast fares better. I loved Will Geer as the aging fur trapper Bear Claw. This guy has all the panache that Redford lacked and the movie would have been better had it made him the focus. Allyn Ann McLerie has a small, but riveting role as ‘the crazy woman’ who is unable to cope, or accept the fact that her family has been slaughtered by an Indian attack.  Stefan Gierasch has his finest hour as Del Gue a fur trapper that Jeremiah comes upon. During the first half you see him as bald only to have him return in the second half with a full head of hair. The scene where he is shown buried in sand up to his head is amusing and disconcerting at the same time.

My biggest issue with the film is when Jeremiah starts to fight off all the Indian warriors who attack him. I just could not believe that one man would be able to defeat and kill so many of them. I could understand maybe a few, but eventually odds would have to catch up with him. There is never any special skill shown for why Jeremiah seems to always get the upper hand during these battles. The fights themselves are not exciting as they are much too brief and edited in a way that it is hard to follow the action. It seems like it takes only a few seconds from when the Indian jumps him to when Jeremiah already has him on the ground dead. Jeremiah is also the only person I know of who can have a large spear pierce his body and all he does is pull it out and go on living without any noticeable injury.

The first half is more compelling than the second, which had me feeling bored. The side-story of having him take on an Indian bride as well as a young boy who does not speak has potential, but doesn’t go far enough with it. For an adventure story there is very little action outside of the Indian battles that to me seemed phony. The best sequence is a wolf attack that is nicely edited and graphic. The Crow Indian burial scene is effectively moody and starkly photographed.

The screenplay by John Milius and Edward Anhalt was written using material from two different novels and the lack of cohesion shows. Part of it wants to be a gritty nature drama while the other half plays like a mystical fantasy, but this uneasy mixture never gels, or works.

My Rating: 6 out of 10

Released: December 21, 1972

Runtime: 1Hour 56Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Sydney Pollack

Studio: Warner Brothers

Available: VHS, DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Instant Video

The Odd Job (1978)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 2 out of 10

4-Word Review: Hired to kill him.

            Arthur Harris (Graham Chapman) comes home one day to celebrate his wedding anniversary only to find that his wife Fiona (Diana Quick) is leaving him. He becomes so despondent that he decides to kill himself. He has a lot of problems doing it, but then he receives a knock on his door by a man (David Jason) looking for some ‘odd jobs’. Arthur decides to hire him to be his killer, but when his wife decides to come back Arthur is thrown into a state of panic trying to avoid being killed.

Normally I love British comedies and this one seemed to have all the ingredients to being a hilarious one, but it never gels. The opening bit where the couple is arguing and Arthur insists that they are ‘happily married’ even if she doesn’t think so is full of great English wit, but everything after that falls into a lull. The jokes become long and elaborate where so much time is spent building the set-up that getting to the punch-line becomes trying. The restaurant scene is particularly drawn-out and unfunny. The ‘zany’ chase sequence in the zoo is derivative and flat.

Quick was not a good casting choice as the spouse. She is too young and beautiful a wife for such a nebbish man. A good comic character actress who was more frumpy and dowdy would have been a better fit. Quick doesn’t show any comic ability, or timing as her affected responses and facial expressions become annoying and tiring. There is also no motivation for why the character decides to come back to her husband and although this is absurd comedy there still needed to be one otherwise the writing comes off as forced and sloppy, which it is.

Chapman doesn’t completely work in his role either.  It seemed strange that he would want to kill himself when a super-hot lady neighbor is more than willing to go to bed with him and even strips off your clothes and hops into the sack before he goes running off in fright. There is also the issue that killing oneself because your wife as left you seems extreme. Most men would probably celebrate if this happened to them and it is hard to relate to a protagonist that seems so pathetic. A stronger motivation, like having him killed in a staged murder, so his family could collect on some life insurance money would have been more effective. There is another part where the police become aware that someone is trying to kill him and for some reason Arthur does not tell them of the bizarre scenario when they ask him about it even though to me it made more sense to let them try to apprehend the man instead of continuing to live in fear of being killed.

The music, which is soft and melodic, was a terrible choice as it does not fit the quirky theme, nor complement the fast-paced comic scenarios. The tacked on ‘surprise ending’ is horrible and pretty much cements the film as a misfire. During his Monty Python days Chapman was famous for walking onto the screen and telling the audience that the sketch they were doing had become too absurd and would now end and I wish he had done that here.

My Rating: 2 out of 10

Released: September 3, 1978

Runtime: 1Hour 27Minutes

Rated PG (Brief Nudity)

Director: Peter Medak

Studio: Columbia-EMI-Warner

Available: VHS

The Terminal Man (1974)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 7 out of 10

4-Word Review: Can’t control his impulses.

            Harry Benson (George Segal) is a brilliant computer scientist who begins to suffer from blackouts after receiving a head injury in a car accident.  During these blackouts he goes on terrifying violent sprees, which includes the abuse of his own wife and children. To help control the condition a group of doctors come up with an experimental procedure of implanting a computer chip inside his brain that will set off a signal that will alleviate these compulsions when they begin.  Unfortunately things do not go as planned and Harry’s condition becomes frighteningly worse in this cinematic realization of the Michael Crichton novel.

Director Mike Hodges visualization is the stand-out here. Every scene and camera shot fits together into a seamless whole. The first hour is filled with sets and backdrops showing a square, gray, futuristic –like surroundings while the second half features more white interiors while still maintaining the modernistic look.  Hodges shows a terrific awareness of every little sight and sound making each one an integral part of the story. From a visual perspective it is brilliantly handled and a masterpiece in need of more attention.  His use of classical music by Johann Sebastian Bach is equally effective. One particularly unique scene has Harry violently stabbing someone to death during one of his seizures, but instead of hearing the expected pounding music we instead hear the soft strains of Bach while the victim’s blood creates a red pattern on the white tiles of the floor.

The operating sequence and build-up to it is especially captivating and takes up most of the runtime.  I appreciated how a great deal of care was taken to make everything follow a very believable logic. The intricate procedure itself becomes fascinating and riveting to watch as they drill small holes into the patients head and use tiny metal tubes to literally shoot the mechanical pellets into strategic spots in the brain.

Segal, mostly know for light comedies, takes a nice break into drama here. He does a terrific job at getting the viewer to see him as a human being and feel empathy for his situation and when he has his head shaved he looks exactly like Howie Mandel . The part where he screams “Make it stop! Make it stop!” as he goes through another of his violent outbursts is especially moving and disturbing.

The supporting cast is strong as well although I didn’t particularly care for Donald Moffat and his put-on Irish accent, which was too strong and distracting and completely unnecessary.  Richard Dysart is memorable as the surgeon conducting the operation. He has two of the film’s best lines. One is when he is putting the computer chips into the brain and he states “This is the one job that can be both boring and nerve-wracking at the same time.”  Another great line of his occurs when a reporter asks him he if considers this procedure to be a type of mind control and he responds “What do you call compulsory education through high school?”

Joan Hackett gives her usual solid performance as Janet Ross the one doctor who is more concerned with the welfare of the patient then the implications of the experimental procedure. Jill Clayburgh, in an early role, plays against type here as Harry’s ditzy blonde girlfriend and the change of pace is interesting.

The film certainly makes a strong statement at the potential dangers of medical science and how the medical staff can be highly intelligent in one area, but very dense, immature and selfish in others.  The dehumanization element is pounded home to the viewer and in that respect it succeeds magnificently, but I couldn’t help but feel that it was being a bit unfair. In the years since this film was released the advancements in the medical field have improved the life and health of the patients and society as a whole. The film’s negative slant seems to conform too much to the pessimistic sentiments of its era and its unrelentingly doomful outlook is unnecessary.

My Rating: 7 out of 10

Released: June 19, 1974

Runtime: 1Hour 47Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Mike Hodges

Studio: Warner Brothers

Available: VHS, DVD (Warner Archive), Amazon Instant Video