Category Archives: Movies Based on Novels

Raise the Titanic (1980)

Posted on September 14, 2026 | 3 comments

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 1 out of 10

4-Word Review: Vessel brought to surface.

Government operative Dirk Pitt (Richard Jordan) along with the CIA become aware of an abandoned mine in Siberia that had a rare mineral called byzanium, which could be used to shoot down nuclear missiles. It was supposedly packaged into boxes and loaded onto the Titanic. The US Government now wants to obtain those boxes before the Soviets do and come to the conclusion that the only way to do it would be by raising the sunken ship to the surface.

The film is based on the 1976 novel of the same name written by Clive Cussler and universally panned for its weak characterizations and dialogue, but the plot itself was intriguing enough for Hollywood to take a stab at it. The result though isn’t much better as there’s too many people in the cast many of which are talking head figures like Jason Robards. He’s an excellent actor, but here his only task is to relay orders from other top officials and then stand around and look worried as the plans come into play. David Selby is also quite weak, but this is more because he isn’t an effective leading man and his overall presence is transparent and unnecessary.

Jordan is the only one that does well and had he remained at the center of it, it would’ve worked better. However, there’s no one to become attached to emotionally and the banal dialogue doesn’t give any of them any real distinction. They all seem alike and when one of the submersibles with several men on it implodes it has no impact and you really don’t care.

The book, as flawed as it may have been, actually did things a little better, at least plot wise. It had a hurricane come in, which allowed the soviets to take over the ship and hold the rest of the crew hostage, which then culminated in a battle. The movie though doesn’t touch on any of this. Here only one Soviet spy boards the ship but then realizes he’s easily outnumbered and essentially gives up making it all seem rather pointless to have introduced that angle at all. Granted the hurricane wasn’t included for budgetary reasons, but it certainly would’ve helped bring in more tension of which there isn’t much.

The way the ship gets brought back up to the surface is a bit suspect. I have no expertise in the matter, but it seemed too easy to the extent that it feels almost like a non-event. The special effects are subpar. It’s obvious that it’s a toy model and therefore not half as impressive to look at as it comes to the surface as I’m sure the producers thought it would be. The only moment that I did like is when Jordan boards the ship for the first time. Unfortunately, he only enters one room and then it cuts away. Would’ve been fascinating seeing him walk all around the ship going into many different rooms, but this was again likely scrapped due to the same budget constraints.

Spoiler Alert!

The biggest letdown is with the ending, which is similar to the one in the book where they find the boxes inside the ship’s vault to be filled with nothing more than sand. Then it is deduced, using wildly circumstantial clues, that the rare mineral was buried in a gravesite at a cemetery in Southby, England. However, when this is determined the American agents decide to leave it there, but why was it so important to get their hands on the mineral before, but now suddenly it isn’t? What if the Soviets, or some terrorist group, figure out the locations of the mineral and dig it up? Wouldn’t that still create the same frightening scenario that the US was hoping to avoid when they took so much time, effort, and money to bring up the ship?

This makes the whole thing not only a waste of time for the viewer, but also the taxpayers who funded what amounts to being just a wild goose chase. It becomes an inadvertent satire on government waste and misguided operations and on that level, it succeeds, but as a story it should remain sunk and submerged.

My Rating: 1 out of 10

Released: July 30, 1980

Runtime: 1 Hour 54 Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Jerry Jameson

Studio: ITC Entertainment

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Video, Fawesome, Plex, Roku, Tubi, YouTube

3 Comments

Posted in 80's Movies, Action/Adventure, Drama on the High Seas, Movies Based on Novels

Tagged , , , , ,

M*A*S*H (1970)

Posted on September 7, 2026 | 2 comments

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 7 out of 10

4-Word Review: Rebellious surgeons break rules.

In 1951 during the Korean War Frank Pierce (Donald Sutherland), who goes by the nickname Hawkeye, arrives at the Mobile Army Surgical Hospital as their new surgeon. He gets placed in a tent with Frank Burns (Robert Duvall), but the two don’t get along due to Frank’s religious zealotry, so he gets transferred to another tent. Hawkeye then gets placed with another new surgeon nicknamed Trapper John (Elliot Gould) and the two, with their irreverent sense of humor and non-conforming ways, immediately become best friends. Not only do they break most of the rules, but they also routinely play pranks on others with their biggest ones being on Frank who falls for Margaret (Sally Kellerman) who is a head nurse.

The film, which is based on the 1968 novel ‘MASH: A Novel About Three Army Doctors” by Richard Hooker, which in turn was based on his experiences as an Army doctor during the Korean War, gets largely overshadowed by the TV-Series, which ran for 11 seasons and has become a huge cult hit. In retrospect I actually like the movie better. Robert Altman’s direction where conversations and actions overlap helps to give the setting a realistic kinetic feel where nothing seems staged. While I could’ve done without his patent whistling I still liked the portrayal of the Hawkeye character better here. In the series Alan Alda played him as a very talkative, loud, and opinionated person that dominated every scene he was in while here the character is more like just one of the guys that occasionally pushes-the-envelope, but only because he, like everyone else there, is a victim of the bleak circumstances that they’re in. This also has a much better balance between the humor and drama. The show had a tendency to get preachy but the movie manages to make the occasional serious point, but still overall remains consistently funny.

On the negative side it’s highly anachronistic with the characters behaving too much like it’s the late 60’s instead of the early 50’s almost like they’re a bunch of stoned, ‘free love’ hippies who found a time machine and decided to go back 20 years. While the sexual escapades are amusing it does tend to get one dimensional. Everyone is portrayed as being a sex maniac with no inhibition or restraint. Having some not engage, either because they just weren’t that into it, or wanting to remain faithful to their spouses/ romantic partners back home, would’ve given it a better balance and certainly been more realistic for the period.

Having Hawkeye immediately mock Frank when he wants to pray seemed off too. Granted there were atheists and non-religious people back then, but they tended to be in-the-closet as religion was still the dominant cultural force. If Hawkeye and crew got annoyed later on when Frank attempted to let’s say ‘convert’ them then it would be understandable, but upfront I’d think he’d not be so aggressive with his disdain and might even politely play along a bit, especially since he had just arrived there and wouldn’t know who else he’d be offending with his off-handed comments.

It’s all very disappointing the way Frank gets written out halfway through. I really liked the way Duvall played the role. On the TV-series the Frank character was a benign snobby dimwit that was constantly the butt of all the jokes and couldn’t do much about it, but here Duvall plays the part with an aggressive, even menacing edge that would’ve made him a great nemesis that should’ve allowed him to stay all the way through. Also, it’s a bit ridiculous that he gets put into a strait jacket after he has a confrontation with Hawkeye. Many people can and do get into fights and are not immediately deemed ‘insane’ because of it. If anything, he should’ve been handcuffed along with Hawkeye since it was Hawkeye who goaded him into it.

The Hot Lips character is another disappointment. Initially I thought she was great as her haughty ways helped give the proceedings some conflict, but then halfway through she does a complete Jekyll and Hyde. Initially she hates the place and just about everyone in it, even becomes a victim to a cruel prank, but then later during the big football game she’s seen on the side lines as a cheerleader aggressively rooting for them to win the game when logically you’d think she would be pulling for the other team.

Apparently, the movie’s logic is that since it gets revealed that she’s been having sex with Duke, played by Tom Skerrit, that this then ‘changed’ her. She’s now ‘liberated’ and no longer frigid/uptight, but it’s too drastic a switch that only further adds to the film’s overblown concept that sex can somehow ‘solve everything’.

My Rating: 7 out of 10

Released: January 25, 1970

Runtime: 1 Hour 56 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Robert Altman

Studio: 20th Century Fox

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Video, YouTube

 

 

2 Comments

Posted in 70's Movies, Black Comedy, Buddy Movies, Movies Based on Novels, Movies with a Hospital setting, Movies with Nudity

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Where Are the Children? (1985)

Posted on August 31, 2026 | Leave a comment

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 2 out of 10

4-Word Review: Her kids go missing.

Nancy (Jill Clayburgh) is a married to Clay (Max Gail) and living in Cape Cod with their two children Michael (Harley Cross) and Missy (Elisabeth Harnois). Nancy has a dark past. Nine years earlier she had two other children, Peter and Lisa, who vanished and later found drowned. She was convicted of the crimes but then released on a legal technicality. She remarried, as her first husband (Frederic Forrest), despondent over the deaths, killed himself though his body was never found. Everything was going great until the nine-year anniversary of the deaths when her current two children go missing while playing in their backyard. Could this be just a coincidence, or is someone from the past crimes involved with this one?

The film is based on the Mary Higgins Clark debut novel of the same name, which in turn was inspired by the real-life case of Alice Crimmins, who was convicted in the deaths of her two children, but like in the movie, was later released. The concept has a lot of potential, but for me a lot of tension gets lost when right away we’re shown who the bad guy is and his interactions with the kids. Don’t get me wrong, Forrest is a fine actor and it’s fun seeing him play a nut case and the kids are really good too, but it would’ve been more intriguing had we seen things solely from Clayburgh’s perspective where we really didn’t know much more than she did and having the kids suddenly disappear could’ve been played up as a surreal nightmare.

It’s also cartoonish when the bad guy, who’s been spying on them through a telescope, has to write in his notebook in big letters ‘TOMORROW’ with an exclamation mark in reference to his plan to go through with the kidnapping the next day, but people only write notes to themselves when they’re living busy lives and doing several different projects at once. With this guy it’s the only thing he’s been obsessing over, so therefore no note was needed as he was clearly not going to forget.

The supporting cast is quite dull particularly Gail as the second husband. It’s great that he takes his wife’s side and insists she has nothing to do with the missing kids, but after a while I would think, some doubt would have to creep in. He keeps insisting that he ‘knows’ she didn’t do it, but how could he? He wasn’t home when it happened and because it’s such a coincidence with the past crime any normal person would have to have some suspicion towards her. Having him start to suspect her, even if it’s just slightly, as the film progresses would’ve created an interesting subplot and made his character less one dimensional.

The main character has problems too. For one thing the odds of her having two kids in her second marriage, that are the exact same age as the two from her previous one, including the boy older than the girl, is too astronomically high to be believable. Even her having just one kid, compared to two from the first, would’ve been enough and not made the kids from the second one seem like just a generic carbon copy.

I also felt that if someone has lost her kids in such a traumatic way that she’d been more protective of these to the point that she might go a bit overboard by not letting them play outside or only letting them go out if she was always right there to watch them. Her taking a shower while the kids are outside makes her look irresponsible. When I was a kid one parent would watch the kids while the other one bathed. Bad things and accidents can happen to kids in a matter of seconds and with the water running, she’d have no way to hear it.

For a career move taking this role was a big mistake. Jill had been in several films during the late 70’s and early 80’s that had won high acclaim and she seemed set to become the big leading lady of the 80’s, but she then made the mistake of starring in Hanna K. a Costa-Garvas directed film that saw limited release, so for many filmgoers it seemed like she had disappeared from the film scene and was no longer in the limelight for a good four years. This film role was meant to be her ‘comeback’, but she really doesn’t have much to do for most of it other than sitting around inside the police station wearing a stupor like expression. She kind of comes on strong at the end when she decides she’ll go and save the kids on her own, but she’s just a thin woman with no weapon or any idea who the bad guy is, or how many of them, making it likely that she could easily be overpowered and thus should’ve let the police do it instead.

Spoiler Alert!

The ending, and the reveal of who the bad guy is, is a big letdown. Like I said earlier Forrest gives an interesting performance, but to have him be the first husband who somehow faked his own suicide, isn’t plausible. For one thing it should’ve been reported as a missing person case and not a suicide since his body was never found. At the very least his identity should’ve been kept a mystery till the end when Jilly confronts him in the home versus having sharp-eyed kid recognize him earlier from a news report.

His motivations for why he seeks ‘revenge’ on Jill is confusing. Supposedly he was a closet pedophile who played kinky games on Jill who he forced to dress like a child and when she refused to keep doing that, he started to do it on their kids and then killed them when they threatened to tell, but if anything, he should’ve been happy that Jill was accused of the crime while he was allowed to walk free without suspicion. Would’ve made more sense had the husband really killed himself and then someone who was close to him, like maybe a brother, decided to seek out revenge on Jill while under the mistaken impression that she really had murdered the first children and then unjustly let out.

My Rating: 2 out of 10

Released: November 15, 1986

Runtime: 1 Hour 37 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Bruce Malmuth

Studio: Columbia Pictures

Available: DVD (Out-of-Print), Amazon Video, YouTube

 

 

Leave a comment

Posted in 80's Movies, Kidnapping Movies, Movies Based on Novels, Obscure Movies, Thrillers/Suspense

Tagged , , , , ,

Loophole (1981)

Posted on August 11, 2026 | Leave a comment

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 3 out of 10

4-Word Review: Robbing an ‘impenetrable’ vault.

Mike (Albert Finney) is a career safe cracker who finds their last job unrewarding as the loot was less than expected. He decides their next project will be breaking into a bank safe that is supposedly impenetrable, but with one unknown loophole as it’s housed near a main sewer line. He comes up with the idea that he and his men will go into the sewer tunnels and drill holes through the brick walls until they can get underneath where the safe is and then drill through the floor of that until they can get inside. Of course, once they get into the safe it will set off alarms, but the police will not suspect anyone’s inside as the safe door will still be locked shut. In order for their plans to work they’ll need the assistance of Stephen (Martin Sheen) an architect who will be able to locate where the safe is while they’re tunneling underground. At first, he resists, but pressure by his wife (Susannah York) for him to maintain their affluent lifestyle eventually gets him to agree.

The film starts out in a highly unusual way in that with no backstory, or set-up, or even credits jolt the viewer right into a robbery in progress, watching in detail as Mike and his assistants break into a safe, which is disconcerting.  I almost thought there was some sort of glitch in the streaming of the film, and I had somehow come into it in the middle half and completely bypassed the beginning and this goes on for about 5-minutes. Without knowing who these characters are, or why they’re doing it, it’s not interesting or captivating. The result is off-putting and gives the production an amateur vibe.

When the story does finally come into play it still remains fairly awkward. I was surprised that Finney, who had taken a 4-year break from film acting, would choose this one for his ‘comeback’. The character he plays here is dull and one-dimensional and offers no real arc, or emotion. It’s interesting to an extent to see that he lives in affluence with a family, but the woman who plays his wife looks too similar to York, who plays Sheen’s spouse and thus it gets confusing at times, and more effort should’ve been made to make her distinct from the other.

Sheen does better as at the very least you see some change occur in the person he plays and some drama, at least at the very beginning, in his scenes. I liked how he’s resistant to the plan initially by constantly desribing himself as ‘an honest man’, which allows for some tension, but the way he ultimately caves is disappointing. There is the fact that he’s unemployed and in need of the money, but there still should’ve remained friction all the way through. If honesty is truly important to him then there should be lingering guilt about what he’s getting into and evidence of an inner struggle versus him ultimately just becoming ‘one of the guys’.

The robbery itself is pedestrian and been done before in other films. Having their truck get a flat tire, in order for the crew to slide through a trap door of the vehicle and into the manhole cover of the sewer without being detected, seemed too risky especially since it gets done in the daytime instead of under the darkness of night. At one point even the police drive by, which could’ve backfired as once the robbery has been committed, and the investigators realize how it was done they’ll immediately backtrack to the truck and research from the license plate who owned or rented it. Making it probable that they might not have been able to get away with it and would ultimately be caught.

Spoiler Alert!

The most disappointing aspect should’ve been the most exciting. It has to do with the sewer tunnels flooding during an unexpected rainstorm. Finney and his colleagues decide to wade their way through it, but Sheen hangs back insisting he’d rather stay in the safe though this will risk him getting caught once the bank opens on Monday morning.  Watching the water push up through the hole in the floor of the safe eventually creating an entire pool, which gives Sheen less and less room to stay above it, is quite intense, but then the film sells out in the most horrible fashion I’ve even seen, where he’s shown ‘waking up’ inside his own bathtub with absolutely no explanation of how he got out of the safe. If that’s not a copout I don’t what is and seriously ruins the film to the extent that I suggest no one bother to watch it as the stupid ending just destroys the whole thing.

My Rating: 3 out of 10

Released: March 13, 1981

Runtime: 1 Hour 45 Minutes

Rated PG

Director: John Quested

Studio: Goldcrest Films International

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Fawesome, Plex, Roku, Tubi, Amazon Video

 

Leave a comment

Posted in 80's Movies, British Movies, Foreign Films, Heist Movies, Movies Based on Novels, Robbing Banks

Tagged , , , , ,

Evil Under the Sun (1982)

Posted on July 29, 2026 | Leave a comment

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 4 out of 10

4-Word Review: Who killed the actress?

Hercule Poirot (Peter Ustinov) travels to a luxurious hotel in the Adriatic Sea in order to investigate a diamond that was purchased at Tiffany’s and given to a famous actress named Arlena (Diana Rigg) but later found to be a fake. When Poirot arrives at the resort, he finds the actress to be quite bitchy and disliked by everyone, including Daphne (Maggie Smith) the resort owner who resents Arlena’s fame, as she herself tried out to be an actress at the same time as Arlena, but her career never took off.  There’s also writer Rex (Roddy McDowall) who wants to publish Arlena’s biography, which she now refuses to sign-off on. Producers Odell and Myra (James Mason, Sylvia Miles) resent Arlena because she won’t star in one of their plays, Christine (Jame Birkin) hates her because she’s too flirty with Christine’s husband Patrick (Nicholas Clay), while there’s friction between Arlena and Linda (Emily Hone), Arlena’s 15-year-old stepdaughter, who resents her caustic ways. When Arlena does turn up dead while at the beach it’s up to Poirot to figure out, from the plethora of suspects, which one did it.

This was the second installment with Ustinov playing Poirot after the success of Death on the Nile, and the film starts out with plenty of potential. The exotic locale, filmed on the Balearic Islands, is definitely stunning and a chief asset. The comedic touches, particularly the acerbic interplay between the characters, is another strong point, and helps to make the first hour fun, despite the fact that nothing much happens you’re waiting for the murder to finally happen to the point you begin to wonder if it ever will.

While the production values are high the soundtrack gets overblown. It has a sort of show tune vibe to it, which isn’t bad, but not a good fit for the material. Sure, it’s about an actress who’s starred in some stage productions, but this is something that requires music that helps build suspense, and the stuff here not only doesn’t do that, but actually becomes intrusive. When the characters of Patrick and Myra are boating over to the dead body lying on the beach, the music should’ve been soft and menacing, but here it’s upbeat and booming and this is equally true when Poirot retraces the steps of the killer, where the sound should be downbeat and lowkey and not the reverse.

Spoiler Alert!

The biggest issue I had was with the mystery itself. Normally Agatha Christie does a great job of weaving an elaborate crime, but the resolution here is less than satisfying. While I had never read the 1940 novel of which this is based on, I quickly deemed the Birkin character as being the culprit and the most obvious suspect, so finding out it was her offered no surprise. The way Poirot solves it requires extreme guessing with no proof, like the fact that Birkin has a bottle of sun lotion, or changes the time on Linda’s watch, which is stuff that can’t be fully proven and in a lot of ways a stretch to even deduce. The whole signature thing where the killer (Birkin’s husband) signs his name in the hotel registry, which is a different name that how he signs his cheque, but Poirot is still able to confidently proclaim it’s the same handwriting seemed sketchy too as it didn’t look the same to me.

End of Spoiler Alert!

While the ending is a big letdown the performances by the women are splendid and help keep it entertaining through the lulls. Rigg camps it up perfectly and I enjoyed Smith whose ability to convey droll humor is second to none. Miles is really great too especially her oversized hats, Hone, who’s only ever been in two movies, is fun as the teen who doesn’t hesitate to speak her opinion. Birkin is also excellent particularly because at the time she was a big sex symbol, but here downplays that by covering up her body and coming off as someone who is drab and insecure.

My Rating: 4 out of 10

Released: March 5, 1982

Runtime: 1 Hour 57 Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Guy Hamilton

Studio: EMI Films

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Video, Fawesome, Plex, Roku, Tubi, YouTube

 

Leave a comment

Posted in 80's Movies, Black Comedy, British Movies, Foreign Films, Movies Based on Novels, Movies with a Hotel setting, Mystery

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Been Down So Long It Looks Like Up to Me (1971)

Posted on February 26, 2026 | Leave a comment

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 3 out of 10

4-Word Review: Ahead of his time.

Based on the 1966 novel of the same name by Richard Farina the story follows Paps (Barry Primus) who attends college in the ’50’s but behaves more like someone out of the 60’s and finds it challenging dealing with the rigid mind set of the other students. He gets into a relationship with Kristin (Linda De Coff) but it ends in acrimony when he refuses to meet her parents whom he deems part of the WASP establishment. He eventually gets in with Heff (David Downing) and Jack (Susan Tyrrell) who dabble in drugs and convince him to travel down to Cuba just as the Cuban revolution gets underway, which leads to tragic results.

While the novel did have some humor this film has none, which really hurts it. The expectation would be for a lot of irreverence but shockingly that doesn’t come and instead it’s talky that drones on and doesn’t lead anywhere. The opening bit has some comedy as Paps comes onto and makes out with his attractive young new landlord, played by Marian Clarke, but even that flubs because it brings out the sexually carefree culture of the late 60’s, but since this is supposed to be the 50’s it’s out of place and doesn’t help to establish the staid setting that our main character is supposedly feels imprisoned by.

Farina, who sadly died in 1966 just 2 days after his book got published, had far more interesting experiences in real life attending Cornell University during the late 50’s where he befriended fellow classmate Thomas Pynchon and got suspended for getting involved in student protests, but nothing like that gets shown here. At one point Kristin accuses Paps, during one of their spats, that he does nothing but sit around and waste away and that’s the absolute truth. He’s not actively propelling the action and seems like he’s dropping out of his own movie. I was expecting more lively confrontations between he and the other students, but outside of a few snarky comments this never comes to any adequate fruition. The scenic, tranquil landscape, filmed on location in Meadville, Pennsylvania, is the film’s only asset, but otherwise it stagnates badly.

There are a couple of good moments. One involves actor James Noble playing a priest who is duped into coming to Paps room in order to ‘cure’ him of his ‘deadly illness’, which is funny particularly Noble’s tiny pocketbook of candles and crosses that he brings out in order to perform the ‘last rites’. The painting of an ape that scares Paps while he has a drug trip has some diverting camera work though would’ve been better had the ape come to life though with the special effects capabilities of that era it would’ve been difficult. De Coff, who did just one more movie after this before retiring from the business to become an ordained minister, is really refreshing especially her appealing face, which is attractive but without the glossy Hollywood look.

It’s interesting seeing young stars before they were famous including Raul Julia, John P. Ryan, Susan Tyrrell, Zack Norman as a drug dealer, Nicholas Hammond who later became famous for playing Spiderman, and pop music composer/singer Paul Jabara. Bruce Davidson also gets featured in a small bit, but I was surprised he wasn’t made the star since he had a prominent role in Last Summer, which was released before this one was produced, and looked more age appropriate since he was in his 20’s while Primus was already 32. Either way the script doesn’t bring out these co-star’s talents effectively and their presence doesn’t lift the film out of its otherwise deadening pace.

My Rating: 3 out of 10

Released: September 15, 1971

Runtime: 1 Hour 31 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Jeffrey Young

Studio: Paramount

Available: Amazon Video, YouTube

 

Leave a comment

Posted in 70's Movies, College Life, Movies Based on Novels, Movies with Nudity, Obscure Movies

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

The Sailor Who Fell from Grace with the Sea (1976)

Posted on December 1, 2025 | Leave a comment

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 4 out of 10

4-Word Review: They dissect a cat.

Jonathan (Jonathan Kahn) is a 14-year-old who lives with his mother (Sarah Miles) and nanny Mrs. Palmer (Margo Cunningham) in a beachfront house along the sea after the death of his father three years earlier. Jonathan enjoys his friendship with a group of boys lead by Chief (Earl Rhodes), but his mother does not approve due to Chief’s anti-social sentiment forcing Jonathan to have to sneak out on the sly to see them. One day Jonathan finds a peep hole in his bedroom wall that allows him to see inside his mother’s bedroom, and he begins to peer in on her when she’s undressed, and this creates an unhealthy arousal. When his mother begins a relationship with a sailor named Jim (Kris Kristofferson) he becomes jealous and conveys as much to Chief who devises a sinister plan to ‘solve the problem’.

Lewis John Carlino had a highly respected career as a screenwriter garnering 4 Academy Award nominations for best screenplay, but his three forays as director weren’t as successful and all started out well but ended up just missing the mark. This one was no exception as many critics at the time felt the problem lay in adapting a novel, that was written by Yukio Mishima, which was set in Japan, and trying to convert it to English society. The cultures differences that make up the complex Japanese society that were so integral to the characters in the book gets completely lost in the translation leaving the viewer feeling cold, detached, and genuinely confused when it’s over.

The on-location shooting filmed in Dartmouth, Devon, England, is excellent and the one thing that helps the movie stand-out particularly the isolated hillside house that gives the atmosphere an almost surreal-like feel. There’s also a really creepy performance by Rhodes who nails it as a highly intellectualized kid who displays no moral compass and effectively comes-off as a very believable young sociopath. However, these moments gets coupled with some very disturbing ones dealing with animal cruelty which includes a very drawn-out scene involving the killing and dissecting of a cat as well as putting a firecracker in a seagull’s mouth and while no animal was actually harmed during the production it still left many audiences at the time upset and will very likely do the same with viewers today.

The film’s biggest flaw though is that it doesn’t interpret the character’s actions in any way that helps makes sense of their motivations and for the most part they’re all quite two-dimensional. Jonathan’s arousal at seeing his naked mother needs much better explaining. Most kids aren’t this way, so what is it about his psyche that causes him to enjoy it without any guilt or shame? The movie gives us no clue, nor does it explain how his father died and when you add in the boy’s weird behavior and you start to wonder if the Jonathan maybe had something to do with it, which would’ve opened an interesting subtext if even brought up subtlety, but the script fails to touch on it.

The book makes the reasons for the son’s actions clearer. For instance in the novel the boy losses respect for the sailor when he sees him jump into a water fountain, which he considers to be undignified and the movie really needed to have some similar moment as the kid, like in the book, is initially in awe of the man, but it’s never totally clear what creates the deadly shift. Also, when the son is caught peeping in at his mom the response by his mother in the book is different as she feels the boy should receive a severe punishment, but the sailor, in hopes of becoming ‘friends’ with the kid whom he’s now helping to raise, resists, but the film flubs this scene too by treating it almost like a forgettable throwaway moment that has no impact versus one that would’ve helped reveal the sailor in a more in depth way.

Spoiler Alert!

The ending, which should’ve been a shocker, falls flat as well. In the novel it’s made clear that the boys plan to drug and dissect the sailor just like they did with the cat and they even bring along the tools to do it, in the movie we only witness him drinking the spiked tea. The camera then zooms way out showing the boys at an extreme distance where it’s not obvious what they’re doing. To really make a memorable impression we should’ve seen the boys stab the sailor several times with their knives, which would’ve been far more startling. I felt too there needed to be a reaction from the mother. Does she find out what they did, or does his violent demise remain a mystery? How does her relationship with her son evolve, or devolve afterwards? These questions remain unanswered making the movie seem less like a story and more as a concept that’s never adequately fleshed out.

My Rating: 4 out of 10

Released: April 5, 1976

Runtime: 1 Hour 45 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Lewis John Carlino

Studio: AVCO Embassy Pictures

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Video, Plex, Roku Channel, Tubi, YouTube

Leave a comment

Posted in 70's Movies, British Movies, Drama, Foreign Films, Moody/Stylish, Movies Based on Novels, Movies with Nudity

Tagged , , , , , ,

Hitch-Hike (1977)

Posted on November 24, 2025 | Leave a comment

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 5 out of 10

4-Word Review: Couple picks up killer.

Walter (Franco Nero) and his wife Eve (Corinne Clery) are constantly bickering about Walter’s alcoholism. They go on a trip to Los Angeles and on the way pick-up Adam (David Hess) whose car is stranded on the road. Unbeknownst to them he’s a robber who has doubled-crossed his partners and absconded with a suitcase full of $2 million dollars. It doesn’t take long before Adam has a gun to both of their heads demanding they take him to Mexican border where he plans to escape while also killing them in the process. As the two try desperately to figure a way out they are also being secretly followed by the two young men whom Adam betrayed and who are now intent on extracting a revenge.

One of the biggest problems I had with the movie is that it’s supposed to take place in California but was actually shot in the mountains of Gran Sasso in Italy, which looks nothing like the state. I realize that California has a varied topography but the locales here are screaming southern Europe and the highway signs are done in blue, which anyone living in the U.S. would know is fake as here they’re green, which only accentuates the off-kilter look of the production. Since where they’re driving to makes no real difference to the plot I would’ve just had it be some city in Italy like Rome, which would’ve helped the authenticity.

The other problem I had is that, at least the version I watched, it’s spoken in Italian. Normally I prefer movies that are subtitled versus dubbed, but I could’ve sworn years ago I saw it in English, but what’s available on YouTube, which is the only service currently streaming it, doesn’t offer that, which is a big shame. Not so much because of Nero or Clery, but more Hess as his own voice is not used, which then defeats the whole reason for having him. He’s best known for playing the sadistic killer in The Last House on the Left, and he has an excellent way of being menacing, but because we don’t hear him actually speak in his native tongue all of that gets lost and the creepy energy that was supposed to be there by casting him gets completely wasted.

Spoiler Alert!

The story, which is based on the unpublished novel ‘The Violence and the Fury’ by Peter Kane, doesn’t get off to a good start as it features two people, particularly Nero, who are not likable, and thus the viewer really doesn’t care about their predicament making the tension mediocre at best. There are also elements that are stolen from better known movies like the mysterious truck that keeps chasing them during their drive, with the identity of the driver hidden, that’s taken straight from Duel. Loopholes abound as well as we later learn that Hess is the driver of the truck, but how was he able to avoid being shot by his cohorts earlier with a gun aimed right at him and how was he able to hijack the truck as he had been without any vehicle? Maybe he was able to hitch a ride with a truck driver, just like he did with the couple, and then do away with the driver once inside, but this is stuff that needs to be shown as otherwise it comes-off like the filmmakers are just making up the rules as they go with no concern whether it’s logical.

The twist ending is limp as it features Nero setting the car on fire with his injured wife inside and putting Hess’s dead body next to hers in an attempt to make it look like both he (Nero) and she died in the blaze, but there were such things as dental records back then, so after the coroner examined the charred bodies he/she would determine that it wasn’t really Nero who died and thus the authorities would continue to search for him. Seeing him then become a hitchhiker himself leaves open too many questions and comes off like a cop-out where the filmmakers ran out of ideas and thus decided to just end it there.

End of Spoiler Alert!

The moment where Nero is forced to watch Hess make love to his wife, and witnessing the humiliation and anger in his eyes, is the film’s best moment. Watching Clery, the only person you sympathize with, is entertaining both with her clothes on and off. However, the film lacks any character development, and the plot is quite strained with a lot of moments where the story, much like with the car ride, doesn’t seem to be going anywhere and if anything, just driving itself around in circles.

My Rating: 4 out of 10

Released: March 4, 1977

Runtime: 1 Hour 44 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Pasquale Festa Campanile

Studio: Explorer Film ’58

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, YouTube

Leave a comment

Posted in 70's Movies, Foreign Films, Italian Films, Movies Based on Novels, Movies with Nudity, Road Movies, Thrillers/Suspense

Tagged , , , , ,

The Exorcist (1973)

Posted on October 24, 2025 | 2 comments

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 10 out of 10

4-Word Review: Possessed by the devil.

Chris McNeil (Ellen Burstyn) is a famous Hollywood actress living on location in a neighborhood of Washington D.C. known as Georgetown where the latest movie she’s working on is being shot. She’s renting a posh home along with her two servants (Rudolf Schundler, Willi Engstrom), her secretary Sharon (Kitty Winn) and her 12-year-old daughter Regan (Linda Blair). Things start out fine, but then Regan begins exhibiting odd behaviors. Chris takes her to several doctors as Regan’s anti-social traits continue. The doctors prescribe various drugs, but nothing works. At her wits end Chris, a non-believer, finally resorts to asking a local priest, Father Karras (Jason Miller) if he’ll perform an exorcism on her daughter. Karras though is going through a crisis of faith and doesn’t believe the archaic ritual will help her but becomes more convinced after he visits the girl who displays knowledge of his personal life that she would not have known about otherwise. Eventually he asks the church for permission to conduct one, but under the condition that he do it alongside Father Merrin (Max Von Sydow) an elderly man with a heart condition who had done an exorcism many years earlier in Africa.

The film was based on the bestselling novel of the same name that in-turn was inspired by the true-life event that occurred in 1949 where priests performed an exorcism on a troubled 14-year-old boy named Ronald Edwin Hunkeler. Author William Peter Blatty, read about the incident while a student attending Georgetown University. After having become a successful screenwriter during the 60’s where he wrote mainly comedies for director Blake Edwards, he approached his agent about writing a horror novel about a child possessed but was initially talked out of it. Then in 1968 he watched Rosemary’s Baby, which he felt had a weak ending that he could’ve done better, so he brought up the exorcism concept to a book publisher while attending a cocktail party and he agreed pay him a $25,000 advance to write the book in 10-months. Upon publication the sales were at first sluggish, but then after an appearance on the ‘Dick Cavett Show’ they skyrocketed, which soon lead to a movie rights deal with Blatty commissioned to write the script.

The movie follows the book closely though in a more condense form with scenes that were groundbreaking in its level of explicitness and perversity including an infamous crucifix masturbation moment. However, it’s the angiography that many viewers found the most disturbing. While it’s shockingly explicit it’s also lauded by medical professionals as being highly accurate and for many years afterwards was used in radiological training films. Many critics at the time condemned the scene labeling it ‘irresponsible’ and ‘needless’, but I liked it. A good horror movie should put the viewer in an uneasy state right from the start and then continue to turn the screws tighter as it goes on. This moment clearly telegraphs to the audience that the filmmakers will not shy away from showing something graphic even if it’s outside of good taste and if they’re going to be this brazen with this scene then it makes it all the more unsettling about what’s to come next. 

In many ways, and I don’t believe it was intentional, but the film does become an inadvertent satire on the medical, psychiatric community as their ‘diagnosis’ on Regan are really just guesses and the extreme reliance on prescribing medications, which they feel will somehow ‘resolve everything’. I didn’t really have a problem with this as I think many doctors at the time, and maybe even now, would respond the same way if given such a bizarre case. My one issue though is that eventually one of them, played by Peter Masterson, gets up in front of a roundtable of other doctors and suggests that Chris take Regan to an exorcist. I don’t believe any real medical doctor would ever suggest it or certainly be met with pushback by the other medical professionals in the room. I realize the movie had to find a way to progress to the third act, so the idea of an exorcist needed to be brought up at some point, but it would’ve made more sense had it come from Chris’s servants, who were deeply spiritual already. Chris could’ve scoffed at it at first, but then after thinking and even reading up on it, would eventually relent. 

The performances are uniformly excellent. Burstyn was not the first choice as there were other actresses more famous than her at the time, but her ability to display distraught emotion and continue to do so as it progresses and still keep it fresh and genuine makes her the best person for the role bar none. Blair is quite good too though Mercedes McCambridge does voice the demon during the exorcism moments, which kind of affects things. Don’t get me wrong McCambridge’s deep vocals makes it scarier, but had the lines, which are quite obscene, been recited by Blair herself it would’ve made it more shocking. Plus, it would still allow credence for the doctors to say it was a mental illness and not a possession since whatever was being said was coming from her natural voice. 

The real star though is Father Karras as he’s the one that goes through an actual internal change during the course of the story, from a person who’s had a crisis of faith to ultimately regaining it. Miller, who’s perfect, was not the original choice as Stacey Keach had already been offered the role and signed on, but then director William Friedkin went to watch the play That Championship Season, which Miller had written and afterwards the two met backstage and Friedkin talked about his new project that got Miller to describe his own Catholic upbringing and his quarrels with it, which convinced Friedkin that he’d be the better actor and thus the studio bought Keach out of his contract. As much as I like Keach this was still a good move as Miller’s guilt-ridden face, which gets on full display every time he’s in front of the camera, leaves a lasting visual impression. I also liked the way the character remains skeptical until the very end versus other horror films that would have the people believing in the supernatural right away, or pretty quickly. However, in real-life there’s always going to be cynical people, so allowing in their apprehension through Karras makes the story stronger and more three-dimensional. 

Spoiler Alert!

I felt the ending, in which Chris pronounces Regan to be ‘cured’ and not remembering a thing and then driving away, to be a bit lacking. Chris was portrayed as being secular, but you’d think after what she saw her daughter going through would’ve changed that. This could’ve been done subtly by having her holding a crucifix, something she had despised her staff putting underneath her Regan’s pillow earlier or just shown wearing a small one around her neck. 

I also didn’t like the side-story dealing with the Burke Dennings character, played by Jack MacGowran, being apparently pushed out the window by the demon and falling to his death down a flight of cement stairs as this takes away the impact of when it happens to Father Karras at the end. Instead of Karras’ death being the shocking, unexpected twist that it should’ve it comes off more like a ‘here-we-go-again’ thing. If I had been the director I would’ve removed both Dennings death and Lee J. Cobb character completely as I really didn’t think he added much or helped progress the story forward. I would’ve still had the steps being shown in the early part of the film as a forewarning by having Karras runup them during his early morning workouts and this could’ve been when he first met Chris as they’d bump into each other one day while she was leaving to go somewhere. The head being twisted all the way around, which is described as happening to Dennings, but never shown, could’ve been revealed as occurring with Karras, possibly with his eyes glowing when the pedestrians come running to his aid, which would’ve been a good creepy final horror visual. 

My Rating: 10 out of 10

Released: December 26, 1973

Runtime: 2 Hours 15 Minutes

Rated R

Director: William Friedkin

Studio: Warner Brothers

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Video, YouTube

2 Comments

Posted in 70's Movies, Academy Award Winners for Best Screenplay, Classic, Horror, Movies Based on Novels, Spiritual Movies

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

The Other (1972)

Posted on October 8, 2025 | 1 comment

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 7 out of 10

4-Word Review: Twin brother causes havoc.

Niles and Holland (Chris and Martin Udvarnoky) are twin brothers living with their mother (Diana Muldaur) and aunt and uncle (Norma Connolly, Lou Frizzell) on an isolated farm. Niles becomes good friends with Ada (Uta Hagen) a neighbor lady who taps into Niles’ special abilities. She teaches him a technique in which he can separate his mind from his body and then have it harbor in another body be it a person, or animal, or even a bird. Ada though fears Niles is using this ability for evil purposes when those around him begin turning up dead. When his mother is found at the bottom of the stairs unconscious and stuck to a wheelchair the rest of her life afterwards Ada tries to convince Niles to give up the game, but Niles insists it’s really his brother Holland that’s committing the acts of violence and not him, but Ada refuses to believe him as she’s in on a secret that Niles is refusing to accept.

Tom Tryon, who had been an actor throughout the 50’s and 60’s, became frustrated at the quality of roles he’d been offered and wanted to try novel writing. After watching Rosemary’s Baby and seeing the reaction it got he decided to write his own horror story basing it on some of the experiences he had gone through while growing up in a small New England town. It took nine different rewrites before he was able to get it published where it became a best seller and allowed him to quit acting and become an author fulltime. When it was bought into a movie Tryon retained the rights to the story, which allowed him to write the screenplay though he later admitted to not liking the finished product and blaming it on the casting and editing, which had cut out a significant portion of the story, over 25-minutes of it, based on feedback from test audiences.

On the surface the film really doesn’t seem much like a horror movie, or at least what modern audiences have come to expect from horror. There’s no gore, several of the killings aren’t even shown and just implied, there’s also no shocks, or scares and the majority of the plot takes place outside in the sunshine versus the darkness of night. Initially viewers didn’t take to it too well and it lost money at the box office with many feeling that Robert Mulligan, best known for having done To Kill a Mockingbird, was not the right choice for this type of material with the biggest complaint being that the movie was ‘too beautiful’ and made more like a drama, which had been my feeling when I first saw it years ago on TV. However, after viewing it again in its complete form without any commercials I was able to get into it more and if one is patient, it can have many benefits.

It still could’ve been played up more, and I didn’t like the setting at all. It was shot in Murphys and Angel Camp, California even though the setting in the book had been a small town in the east. Originally Mulligan had wanted to shoot it in Connecticut, but since the story took place in the summer and they weren’t able to begin production until the fall he felt the leaves changing color would have a negative effect and thus choose to do it in the west, but topography is all wrong as all you get is very dry, brown, parched earth that doesn’t allow for much atmosphere. The eastern autumn foliage would’ve been to its benefit and made it even creepier as it would’ve reminded one of Halloween.

Despite this there are some good moments like the twin’s trip to the circus where they sneak behind the curtains and view the participants of the freakshow including witnessing a fetus floating in a glass jar of liquid, which is a great foreshadowing. Niles ability to view things outside himself like witnessing the point of view of a crow as it flies around the property is well done too though the best moment comes at the end when a baby is found missing during the night that creates a panic and is quite riveting both emotionally and visually.

The Udvarnoky twins was an unusual choice as they hadn’t been in any movies before, nor did anything films afterwards and only became aware of the roles through their grade school teacher who sent in their headshots upon learning that a film was being shot in the area and searching for twins to star in it. Originally the part was meant for Mark Lester, who could’ve done it easily since neither twin is ever in the same shot, but the brothers do admirably especially Chris, who sadly died at the young age of 49 from kidney disease, who’s able to carry the film throughout and in just about every scene though their constant whispering may eventually become irritating to some. Uta Hagen, who was known for being an acclaimed acting teacher as well as for her stage work, but had never been in a movie before, is splendid and the one element that keeps it both compelling and unnerving. Good work too by Victor French in a small, but pivotal bit and a young John Ritter.

Spoiler Alert!

The story was actually given three different endings. In the book we find that Niles is sitting inside a mental hospital as an adult and describing what happened through flashbacks. In the version broadcast on TV Niles is able to escape the fire set by Ada, but then through voiceover is heard talking to his dead brother where he states that they’ll be ‘taken away’ (most likely an institution) and will be able to ‘play the game’ there. In the film though we see Niles looking out his bedroom window before being called down to dinner revealing that he had escaped detection by the others who did not suspect him of committing the killings and thus was still free to kill again, which is the scariest.

My Rating: 7 out of 10

Released: May 26, 1972

Runtime: 1 Hour 41 Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Robert Mulligan

Studio: Twentieth Century Fox

Available: VHS, DVD-R

1 Comment

Posted in 70's Movies, Horror, Movies Based on Novels, Movies with a rural setting, Mystery, Obscure Movies

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,