Category Archives: Black Comedy

Welcome to the Dollhouse (1995)

welcome to the dollhouse

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 7 out of 10

4-Word Review: She doesn’t fit in.

Another flick about the trials and tribulations of high school life. There is the shy, sensitive, and alienated girl, the bitchy cheerleaders, the bullies, the name calling, the not being able to find a seat at lunchtime, the stupid teachers, the too busy to listen parents, the bratty siblings, and yes even the spitballs. This is a very accurate and concise portrait of Junior High. It will make you soooooooo glad that you are past that age and will never have to go back to it.

It’s the pinpoint accuracy that makes this film stand out the most. Every scene and segment ring true. Even the little stuff from the way the little sister answers the phone to the way our protagonist Dawn Wiener (Heather Matarazzo) always seems to get blamed even when it really isn’t her fault.

Although the film displays many of the ugly elements of that age it doesn’t wallow or sensationalize them. In fact this film has a nicely balanced perspective. It shows scenes from both Dawn’s high school life and family life. It weaves a nice tapestry and observes how interconnected everything really is. The family life scenes are probably more interesting and in many ways just as difficult.

The film has a good ability at bringing out all the confusion that permeates that age. It is interesting how it shows that everyone is a bit alienated and lost. A big fish can simply get eaten up by an even bigger one. For example there is Steve a good looking kid with a nice singing voice. He is ‘cool’ and when in school everything goes his way. Yet when he drops out so as to ‘make it big’ in New York he suddenly realizes how stacked the odds are against him. There is also Brandon the class bully. He is a composite of all those other bullies. At first you really dislike him, but then you witness his very sad home life. You learn to understand not only why he acts the way he does, but also begin to feel sorry for him.

The film also scores by not letting the adults off the hook either. They are in many ways very much of the problem. They suffer from their own type of confusion and have their own type of code. They lack the ability to really communicate as much as the kids do. Junior high may be a mean, ugly, and crazy place, but that is only because it is a byproduct of very mean, ugly, and crazy world.

If the film has a weak point it is with the ending that fails to give any type of closure. Of course it doesn’t have to, but it would have given it more of an impact and made it come more full circle. Yet even if it doesn’t show it we still know that Dawn will make it. There are many scenes that show her to be very resourceful and strong willed when she needs to be. She is, like a lot of us, a survivor.

My Rating: 7 out of 10

Released: September 10, 1995

Runtime: 1Hour 28Minutes

Rated R

Director: Todd Solondz

Studio: Suburban Pictures

Available: VHS, DVD, Amazon Instant Video

You Better Watch Out (1980)

you better watch out

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 1 out of 10

4-Word Review: This Santa isn’t jolly.

As a young boy Harry Stadling (Brandon Maggart) witnessed his mother being groped by Santa Claus, which was apparently his father in the disguise, but it nonetheless created a disturbing image in his mind that shattered the ideal he had for the mythical man. Years later as an adult working a thankless job at a toy factory Harry starts to believe he is Santa Claus and even spies on the neighborhood children to see which ones have been naughty or nice and keeps meticulous records on each. Then on Christmas Eve he dresses up as Santa and delivers presents to some needy kids at a hospital, but also comes into contact with a group of condescending people outside of a church who he then kills. This sends out a police alert where everyone in the city including the regular townspeople is on the hunt for him and Harry tries to avoid them while continuing to deliver his gifts.

For some reason this film never created the controversy of portraying Santa Claus as a killer like Silent Night Deadly Night did even though this film came out 4 years earlier.  Critic Leonard Maltin came down hard on that one in his book, but seemed to like this one, which is the whole reason I gave this one a chance 25 years ago, but I remember disliking it. Since this film has managed to inspire a small cult following I decided to give it another chance, but I didn’t like it any better.

Part of the problem is that it is very slow and plodding with the majority of the film focusing on Harry as he goes through the daily routines of his pointless and lonely life. Nothing that he does is compelling and sometimes it is even confusing. It is hard to call this a horror film even though that is what it is considered because there are really no scares at all and the gore is at an extreme minimum. Maggart gives a solid performance in the lead, but as my acting teacher in school once said a good actor cannot save a weak script, or as he put it ‘you can’t shine shit.’

There are only two killings and neither of them is effective. The killing done outside a church is captured in a choppy editing style with bloody special effects that look fake and it is carried out by Harry while using a toy ax, which seemed ludicrous. I also didn’t think it made a lot of sense for the victims to have such a snarky and sarcastic behavior especially when they were just coming out of a church service. What is worse is that when the victims are killed no one comes to their aid to see if they can save them they just stand on the church steps and stare at their lifeless bodies. An APB is also put out which is broadcast on the TV news stating that the killer escaped in a white van with Christmas sled painted on its side, which is distinct enough that somebody somewhere would have spotted it and yet Harry continues to drive around unheeded.

SPOILER ALERT!

The ending is the weakest part. For one thing some townspeople recognize Harry as being the killer Santa and chase him down through the neighborhood streets while carrying torches, but just where in this modern day and age are people going to find torches? Some fans of the film insist that this is homage to the film Frankenstein, but to be clever it still has to make sense and this doesn’t.  There is also the issue of when Harry drives his van off a bridge instead of going into the river below it instead flies off into the sky like Santa on his sled. Now, since the majority of the film was done from Harry’s perspective this might simply be his last delusional moment before he dies, but the film needed to confirm this and doesn’t, which makes it more annoying than anything.

Writer/director Lewis Jackson has stated in later interviews that he got the idea for this movie while smoking a joint and I think he was still smoking them when he made this thing. The majority of people come away from this thing feeling the same way about it that I did, but I know there are a few that insist it is ‘brilliant’ and if you are one them feel free to leave your comments below and let me know what it is you think I am missing because after two viewings I just don’t see it.

My Rating: 1 out of 10

Released: November 10, 1980

Runtime: 1Hour 40Minutes

Alternate Title: Christmas Evil

Rated R

Director: Lewis Jackson

Studio: Edward R. Pressman Productions

Available: VHS, DVD (Special Edition and in 3D), Amazon Instant Video

Private Parts (1972)

private parts 3

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 7 out of 10

4-Word Review: He likes to watch.

Cheryl (Ayn Ruymen) is a teen who cannot get along with her sister and boyfriend and decides to move out of their apartment and into a seedy hotel run by Martha (Lucille Benson) a very strange old lady. Here she lives next to voyeuristic photographer George (John Ventantonio) who has a big sex doll fetish. Cheryl secretly spies on George having sex with his doll and starts to get off on it. George becomes aware of Cheryl spying on him and likes it, which causes them to form an odd relationship and that is when things really get weird.

The film’s intrigue comes from the way it see-saws between being a perverted character study, horror film, and dark comedy. Director Paul Bartel makes great use of lighting, setting, and camera angles. There is also one truly odd and memorable sequence involving Ventantonio filling up his sex doll with water and then pumping it full of his own blood. The story is subtle enough to keep you involved and guessing and may even take a couple of viewings before you truly ‘get it’.

Much like with his later and better known film Eating Raoul Bartel examines the psychological complexities that make up people’s sexual nature and how perversions and fetishes are a normal part of it. The mindset is that everyone probably has a weird fetish of some kind and the open minded approach is what ultimately makes it refreshing and intriguing.

Although the film teases you with some sex and violence it never really goes all out. By dancing the line between being a horror film and a sex flick it fails to make a lasting impression despite a few good moments.

This is an interesting curio for sure and for its time was really pushing the envelope, but suffers from a low budget and isn’t scary or gory enough. However, George’s sex doll is unforgettable and watching it fill up with his blood is one of the damnedest looking sights ever put on film.

My Rating: 7 out of 10

Released: September 17, 1972

Runtime: 1Hour 27Minutes

Rated R

Director: Paul Bartel

Studio: MGM

Available: VHS, DVD, Amazon Instant Video

The Anniversary (1968)

anniversary 2

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 6 out of 10

4-Word Review: Bette eats them up.

Since tomorrow will mark the 1st anniversary of when this blog started I wanted to choose a movie that had a similar theme in its title. The anniversary here deals with Mrs. Taggart (Bette Davis) celebrating the date of when her and her now deceased husband where married. Taggart is a bully who enjoys manipulating her grown sons and having her way. On this occasion all three of her sons carries a secret, which will all slowly come out as the evening progresses. Terry (Jack Hedley) is the oldest and is married to Karen (Sheila Hancock) their secret is that they plan on moving to Canada much to his mother’s dismay as she likes having her children close by. Henry (James Cossins) harbors a secret fetish to dress in women’s underwear. Tom (Christian Roberts) brings his fiancée Shirley (Elaine Taylor) to visit with their secret being that she is already pregnant.

If you’re a Bette Davis fan then this is required viewing as she is at her bitchy best. Although Mona Washbourne played the role when it was on stage it was revised by Jimmy Sangster for the screen with Davis’s personality very much in mind. It has all of her famous caricatures and she revels in it. Her insults are like arrows that slice through the other characters until they are mush. She gives her part just the right amount of camp and her infatuation with a statue of a little boy that is hooked up with a hose that when squeezed spurts water out of its front end like he is peeing is priceless.

Hancock makes for a good adversary and in fact out of all the other performers she is the only that seems to be able to stay toe-to-toe with Davis. Apparently Davis did not like Hancock and tried to get her replaced with Jill Bennett. Hancock was aware of this and I think that animosity comes out perfectly on the screen.

Taylor is young and gorgeous and she has one good moment when she tells off Davis, but that is about it. The three male actors are just not as effective as the females. Part of it could be the characters that they play, but on the most part they are rather blah.

Director Roy Ward Baker, who replaced Alvin Rakoff one week into the shooting at Miss Davis’s request, does his best to avoid the filmed stage play look. He opens the movie at an outdoor construction site, which is unusual. He also has a dazzling fireworks display in the middle, but my favorite is when Henry steals women’s bras and panties from an outside clothesline and replaces them with dollar bills in an attempt to ‘pay’ for what he is stealing. Yet despite all this the movie eventually gets stagy and becomes a bit draggy for it.

My biggest complaint is the fact that this type of thing has been done before. There is no new angle or perspective to any of it. Davis rants on and on with the other characters too cowardly to fight back. The little that they do is not enough. This is the type of film that screams for a big payoff, but it never happens. Taggart, as mean as she is, comes through it pretty much unscathed and for most viewers that will probably not be satisfying.

My Rating: 6 out of 10

Released: February 7, 1968

Runtime: 1Hour 35Minutes

Rated NR (Not Rated)

Director: Roy Ward Baker

Studio: 20th Century Fox

Available: DVD

Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 9 out of 10

4-Word Review: Man can she scream.

Four young adults on a summer trip inadvertently come into contact with a mutant family and their chainsaws.

This is the type of horror film most others strive to be, but usually never succeed. The tension builds right from the start. It’s slow but consistent and eventually hitting on an almost unparalleled level. Director Tobe Hooper and cinematographer Daniel Pearl make terrific use of the location shooting. Between the music and visuals you are given an otherworldly sense. The atmosphere literally hugs you with the dementia of the situation. You feel as engulfed with it as our heroine Sally Hardesty (Marilyn Burns). It transcends most other horror films simply because of its intensity and grotesque perspective. It blends so many unusual things together and yet everything still works. It’s both artsy and raw, moody and exciting, humorous and ugly and a masterpiece in many ways.

If you are looking for gore you may end up disappointed. Despite its reputation there really is very little if any. Apparently they were going for the ‘PG’ rating, but even so certain scenes become almost laughable with their restraint. One scene in particular features Leatherface (Gunnar Hanson) jumping out at a man in a chair. He jams his chainsaw into him and yet only small droplets of blood can be seen coming out.

There is also the problem of Marilyn Burns running. By most crew accounts she was a slow runner. This caused problems because it would allow the assailants to actually catch up to her even though they weren’t supposed to. Both Hansen and Edwin Neal as the Hitchhiker have to do some goofy things to avoid reaching her. This is obvious in the final chase sequence and it hurts the tension a bit.

I still feel though that Marilyn was a good choice for the part. Her face holds an authentic look of terror and her screams reach amazing decibels. The graphic close-ups of her eyes are astounding and memorable.

This film makes its sequels look awful. A good companion to this picture is Hooper’s follow-up film Eaten Alive. It has the same atmosphere and intensity and is interesting in an equally odd way with Neville Brand making a unique villain.

My Rating: 9 out of 10

Released: October 1, 1974

Runtime: 1Hour 23Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Tobe Hooper

Studio: Bryanston Distributing

Available: VHS, DVD, Blu-ray 

Batman Returns (1992)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 8 out of 10

4-Word Review: This version is cool.

Genuinely twisted, marvelously executed superhero tale in this the second and by far the best in the series. This time Batman (Michael Keaton) must battle both Catwoman (Michele Pfeiffer) and The Penguin (Danny DeVito) who is running for mayor.

The big reason I feel that this film works so well is because director Tim Burton continues to use the city of Gotham as the major centerpiece. It’s a consistently gray apocalyptic setting with a surreal element that has its own unique set of rules that correlates well with the story. It also emanates a cold and lonely feeling that creates the desperation and madness that the villains show.

The villains themselves are terrific. The film nicely captures their dark nature and all the components that drive them to it. They are colorful, but still menacing and funny without being silly. Also, unlike a lot of today’s action flicks they are not used merely as props to spew out clever one-liners.

Devito as The Penguin makes one of the better villains. He is physically perfect for the role. He wears some nice ghoulish make-up and is not one-dimensional. We are shown that he was a ‘freak baby’ and how badly he was treated and thus understand his personality. He does get vicious, but in a funny way kind of like the Louie De Palma character he played on the TV-show ‘Taxi’. The only thing that is missing is the Penguin walk that Burgess Meredith had in the 60’s TV series.

Pfeiffer as Catwoman does her part without a fault and yet doesn’t seem completely right for the role. I found it hard to believe that with such a great looking face and figure that she could be overlooked by all the men even if does wear glasses and act nerdy. Also, the sinister cat has always been portrayed as being a black one and therefore the Catwoman character would have been better played by a raven haired actress. Sean Young competed for the role and might have been a better fit as her complexion is darker and her voice deeper. Pfeiffer though is still quite good and her constant dual personalities make her character interesting.

Keaton is the weakest link and continues to seem uncomfortable in his superhero role. Having the boy wonder beside him would have helped.

This feature comes together much better than the first one and has a more complete vision. It is kind of like a Grimm fairy tale, cult comedy, sci-fi, and modern day actioner all rolled into one. There is a good set-up and a nice emphasis on atmosphere. The humor never gets out of hand and is always laced in dark origins. It stays consistently twisted including the finale which features bomb wearing penguins marching into Gotham ready to blow it all up. Lots of fun!

My Rating: 8 out of 10

Released: June 19, 1992

Runtime: 2Hours 6Minutes

Rated PG-13

Director: Tim Burton

Studio: Warner Brothers

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

Cemetary Man (1994)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 5 out of 10

4-Word Review: They shoot the zombies.

The film opens with a cemetery worker (Rupert Everett) talking on the phone with a friend. He hears a knock at the door and when he answers it he sees a man with bluish, decayed skin ready to attack him. The worker calmly takes out a gun, shoots the man in the head, and then goes back to talking on the phone like nothing happened.  Thus begins this very quirky horror comedy that is a send-up of all those old zombie movies and has acquired a cult following.  It was filmed in Italy and is based on the popular Italian comic book ‘Dylan Dog’ by Tiziano Sclavi.

The initial premise is fun.  The protagonist is Francesco Dellamorte, who with his mute and mentally-challenged assistant named Gnaghi (Francois Hadji-Lazaro), are stuck running a cemetery in a small Italian town where the dead will routinely come back to life. It is then up to them to shoot the zombies in their head, which will kill them permanently.  This starts a wild array of crazy scenarios that become increasingly bizarre as the film progresses.

Initially I found it to be inventive.  The tongue-in-check humor is first-rate as is the snappy dialogue.  The film though starts to bite off more than it can chew.  All sorts of weird storylines get thrown in, but are never resolved.  After about the first hour it no longer made any sense.  For instance there is Francesco’s girlfriend named She (Anna Falchi), who he accidently kills at the beginning, but then she keeps getting reincarnated as different women throughout the rest of the film.  For various reasons Francesco is forced to kill her in different ways all over again, which eventually becomes tiring. This is only one of the many convoluted surreal elements that eventually overwhelm the viewer.  By the time it got to its extensile ending I was more than happy that it was over and really no longer cared what happened to the characters.

I felt frustrated because there were a lot of cool ideas that the film brings up, but drops without explanation.  I thought the original idea was good enough that the film could have stuck with that and built around it without going off on so many tangents. The special effects were a problem as well as they looked cheap and fake.  It was obvious when they were using mannequins in the place of real people and the blood and gore were thrown in haphazardly.

I did however like the pacing, which moves quickly with no letup.  The set designs are imaginative and the dark humor is consistently funny. If I would suggest this movie for any reason it would be that one.  Even when the story was getting annoyingly out-of-control it still had me chuckling.  The best scene involves Francesco talking to a sick friend in the hospital and when anyone from the hospital staff tries to intervene he shoots them and this creates a memorably macabre imagery as the room gets filled up with bodies and blood everywhere.

I also liked the character of Gnaghi, who tends to grow on you and becomes a real scene stealer.  He is short, fat and bald and looks like a young version of Uncle Fester from ‘The Adams Family’.  He speaks only through grunts, but the way he responds to things is quite amusing and the director comes up with clever ways to make the most of it.  The fact that he was played by a rock musician and not a professional actor makes it more interesting.  The part where he falls in love with one of the corpses and wants to marry her is hilarious and should have been played out more.

I liked the character of Francessco at the beginning as well.  He comes off like a rugged cowboy from the old west with a nifty matter-of-fact attitude towards his job and is cool under pressure. However, his behavior and actions become erratic and his motivations confusing until, by the end, he is almost alienating. There are also too many segments where he gets caught off guard by an attacking zombie and panics when he does not have his gun handy, which hurts the credibility since someone who has been doing this for a long time and is as savvy as he portrayed would learn to expect the unexpected and be prepared at all times for it.

I hate to say that this film was a disappointment because it is very creative and the direction is slick.  Unfortunately it just could not sustain its potential, which makes it a misfire. The film did quite poorly with both the critics and viewing public when it was first released both in Europe and in the states. It was only after being hailed by director Martin Scorsese that it started to find new life in the DVD market. Actor Everett was in talks with American studios to do a big-budget Hollywood remake, but it fell through.  A remake would not be a bad idea and may still happen as the horror-dark comedy genre has proven to be profitable in recent years most notably with Zombieland.  A tighter script and more money on the special effects could make this a winner.

My Rating: 5 out of 10

Released: March 25, 1994

Runtime: 1Hour 45Minutes

Rated R

Director: Michele Soavi

Studio: Angelo Rizzoli

Available: VHS, DVD, Blu-ray

Luv (1967)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 4 out of 10

4-Word Review: Jump off the bridge.

            Based on the play by Murray Schisgal the film follows the exploits of Harry Berlin (Jack Lemmon) a hopeless neurotic who tries to commit suicide by jumping off a bridge only to be saved by his long lost friend Milt (Peter Falk). Milt wants to use Harry to have him fall in love with his wife Ellen, so that way she will agree to a divorce and free him up to get with a hot young blonde named Linda (Nina Wayne).  Things initially work as planned. Harry and Ellen fall in love and marry and Milt does the same with Linda, but then Milt and Ellen find that they are not compatible with their new mates and long to get back together. The problem is that Harry refuses to grant a divorce forcing them to try and coax him back out on the bridge, so he will finally jump off it and get out of their way.

Lemmon’s performance is the best thing about this otherwise strange experiment. He is like his Felix Unger character put on speed. His weird quirks and idiosyncrasies help propel the story to newer and more absurd heights. In his more straight comedies Lemmon has always seemed a bit benign and showing a nervous energy that is more annoying than funny. Here though he falls into his comic niche bringing out the bizarreness of his character with an almost creepy clarity. I thought it was interesting that although he was a leading man he chose to do an ensemble comedy. Although this film can be deemed a failure I still found it commendable that he was willing to test his acting range and image by taking on an unusual role.

Falk doesn’t fare as well. I thought it was great that he reteamed with Lemmon after performing with him in The Great Race, but his character really isn’t all that funny. May is usually great with sardonic material and has made a career out of performing and writing this kind of stuff, but she really isn’t given all that much to say that is amusing. I liked her charts that she creates for both Milt and Harry measuring all the hours they have been married with all the hours that they have had sex, which has a nice goofy element. Wayne is attractive, but her high, squeaky voice can quickly become annoying. Her acting abilities are limited and she clearly seems outclassed by her supporting counterparts. Had a stronger more established actress been cast in the role it certainly would have helped.

Director Clive Donner doesn’t show a good feel for the material. There are certain parts that are funny like when Ellen and Harry spend their honeymoon at Niagara Falls attacking and physically hurting each other just to see if the other will still love them afterwards. I also liked some of the potshots at modern day suburbia, but other than that this thing falls flat. There are too many scenes that go on forever with jokes and comic bits that are more stupid than clever. The opening sequence has a nice distinctive jazz score along with a montage of kitschy artwork and there is interesting camera work and editing during a sequence at an amusement park, but the rest of it becomes a filmed stage play. The pacing is slow and devoid of the unique directorial flair that could make an offbeat thing like this work. The climactic scene at the bridge is particularly strained and helps cement this as a hopeless misfire.

This movie is probably best known for being the film debut of Harrison Ford who has one word of dialogue and appears as an irate motorist who punches Harry in the face. I wished there had been more of him as although it is very brief he is one of the best things in it.

My Rating: 4 out of 10

Released: July 26, 1967

Runtime: 1Hour 33Minutes

Rated NR (Not Rated)

Director: Clive Donner

Studio: Columbia

Available: VHS, DVD

The Honeymoon Killers (1969)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 7 out of 10

4-Word Review: Kill the old ladies.

A lonely and overweight nurse by the name of Martha Beck (Shirley Stoler) meets and falls in love with the shady Raymond Fernandez (Tony Lo Bianco) through a ‘lonely hearts’ club. As their relationship progresses he confides in her his practice of marrying women and then robbing them of their savings. She decides to get in on the scheme by posing as his sister. Together they roam the countryside and murder and rob lonely old ladies in this darkly humored tale that is based on actual events.

It is impossible to watch this film and not have actress Shirley Stoler imprinted on your mind forever after. The scenes of her working at the hospital make her seem like the ‘real’ Nurse Ratched. Lo Bianco is also perfectly cast in his role as Fernandez when one reads the actual account of the case the face and voice of Lo Bianco’s almost immediately comes to mind even before you’ve seen the film. His slow revelation at finding out just how vicious and cold Martha really is and that she ends up shocking even him is memorable. The crime sequences themselves are more like humorous vignettes. The lady victims are all humorously flawed and portrayed with such a variety of annoyances that you end up finding yourself looking forward at seeing them ‘get it’. The music played over the killings that starts out low as the crime begins and then builds to a loud and intense crescendo is terrific and the black and white cinematography nicely compliments the stark subject matter.

I was disappointed that although this is a story that is based on actual events for whatever reason the film is set in the present day when the actual events took place in the 1940’s.This was possibly done for budgetary reasons, but it would have made it much more authentic had it been kept in its proper time period. It would also have helped the viewer gain a little more understanding to the Martha Beck character had it given us more of a background on her. In real life Beck had been abused by her father and was also the mother of two children and yet the film never even mentions any of this.

The film wonderfully explores the twisted and sometimes pathetic nature of people in both the perpetrators and in the victims. This becomes much more than a simple reenactment of a true crime story and more like a dark expose of our fragmented world and the fringe characters that dwell in it.

Martin Scorsese was the film’s original director, but was fired early on due to creative differences. Leonard Kastle took on the reins and does a fine job. I like his grainy, cinema verite vision and it was a shame that this proved to be his only directorial effort

My Rating: 7 out of 10

Released: September 8, 1969

Runtime: 1Hour 48Minutes

Rated R

Studio: American International Pictures

Director: Leonard Kastle

Available:  VHS, DVD (The Criterion Collection) 

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