Tag Archives: Entertainment

Beyond Therapy (1987)

Posted on June 15, 2025 | Leave a comment

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 3 out of 10

4-Word Review: Therapists nuttier than patients.

Bruce (Jeff Goldblum) is a bisexual who’s tired of his relationship with Bob (Christopher Guest) and thus decides to place a singles ad looking for a female companion. Prudence (Julie Hagerty) answers and the two meet-up at a restaurant, but they find there’s too many differences between them and fail to hit-it-off. Bruce then goes to Charlotte (Glenda Jackson), his therapist, while Prudence visits Stuart (Tom Conti) who’s her therapist and works in the next room beside Charlotte’s. After some counseling, and at Charlotte’s suggestion, Bob places another ad, but changes some of the personal details, causing Prudence to again answer it thinking it’s a different person. They meet at the same restaurant, but this time things click and they agree to go out again, but Bob and his meddling mother Zizi (Genevieve Page) don’t like the fact that Bruce is seeing somebody else and become determined to ruin the potential relationship as does Stuart, who once had a fling with Prudence, and wants to rekindle the old flame, but only if he can get Bruce out of the way.

The film is based on the hit stage play of the same name by Christopher Durang and while that one got rave reviews this version falls off its hinges right away and a lot of the blame should be pointed at director Robert Altman who rejected the screenplay that Durang had written and instead revised it severely causing Durang to feel that very little of his original work was left and lamenting in later interviews that his experience working on this project was an unhappy one. The story is supposed to be set in New York City, but because Altman was living in Paris at the time he choose to shoot it there, but New York’s ambience, where the single’s scene is quite strong, would’ve helped accentuate the theme and allowed for a more vibrant backdrop versus here where everything takes place in a bland cafe, or in the therapists office, with the exception of a few scenes done in Bruce and Bob’s pad, that hampers the visual flair and makes the production look stagnant and cheap. It also ends with a bird’s eye shot of the Paris skyline, but since everyone was speaking in English and without a French accent it makes it off-kilter, and they should’ve at least pretended it was New York even if it wasn’t.

Goldblum comes off as too detached and thus isn’t effective for this kind of role. Hagerty has her moments and at least gets some laughs, but her open disdain for gay people, along with some of her character’s other quirky hang-ups, may not go over well with viewers. Guest plays the gay lover role in too much of a cliched way making him seem like a walking-talking parody, while Page, as his overprotective mother, is excessively hammy and her exaggerated behavior gets in the way and doesn’t add much.

Jackson is a big disappointment though it’s not all her fault as Altman insists on shooting the majority of her scenes through the window of her office making the viewer feel cut-off from her and like she’s intended to be a caricature. Her confusion over words is more disconcerting than funny. Having a therapist that’s a bit daffy is okay and might even be good enough for a chuckle or two, but here she seems genuinely nuts to the extent that you wonder why Bruce would continue to see her. How she’s able to pick-up words said by Stuart in the other office is never made clear, they also seem to have sporadic sexual rendezvous in the room that’s in-between their offices, but this only gets implied and never actually shown though it should’ve been. Conti’s performance is annoying as he speaks in this fake sounding Italian accent, which he finally drops near the end, but should’ve done way sooner.

There are a few in-jokes in regard to Jackson that I did like. One is a refence where her son, played by Cris Campion, asks her to cry, which she does in a comic sort-of way and I think this was alluding to her performance in A Touch of Class, where the script asked for her character to cry, but she refused insisting that crying was just something she didn’t do, so here you finally get to hear her do it, which is fun. Later there’s another bit where Bob talks about the movie Sunday Bloody Sunday, a film that Jackson was in, though here he describes her as being ‘that English actress’, which is amusing, but would’ve been even funnier had, when he later meets her, he could’ve said ‘you look exactly like the English actress in that movie.’

Spoiler Alert!

While the film does become semi-engaging even with its rough, awkward start it manages to blow it up with a dumb conclusion, which has Bob shooting at Bruce with a toy gun while inside the restaurant. We already know it’s a toy because he tried to use it on Charlotte earlier, so having this extended slow-motion sequence where all the customers duck for cover, doesn’t work and becomes overdrawn instead of funny, or suspenseful. Having the group then remain in the restaurant afterwards and even get served food was equally ridiculous as anyone that would’ve caused that much of a melee would most certainly be asked to leave or arrested by the police for causing a disturbance.

My Rating: 3 out of 10

Released: February 27, 1987

Runtime: 1 Hour 33 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Robert Altman

Studio: New World Pictures

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

Leave a comment

Posted in 80's Movies, Black Comedy, Gay/Lesbian, Movies Based on Stageplays

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Double Negative (1980)

Posted on June 11, 2025 | Leave a comment

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 4 out of 10

4-Word Review: Who killed his wife?

Michael (Michael Sarrazin) is a photojournalist tormented by fragmented memories of his wife’s murder. Paula (Susan Clark) is his girlfriend who’s trying to help him sort through these flashbacks, so he can find some answers. However, she too has things to hide as she’s busily paying off a man named Lawrence Miles (Anthony Perkins) who threatens to go to the police about what he knows about the killing. There’s also Lester (Howard Duff) a private investigator who sticks his nose too deeply into the case and finds himself at deadly odds with both Lawrence and Paula.

The film is based on the 1948 novel ‘The Three Roads’ written by Ross Macdonald under his real name Kenneth Millar. Macdonald later went on to have a stellar career writing novels about private investigator character Lew Archer and this story has plenty of potential but gets mishandled and ultimately becomes a misfire. A lot of the problem stems from the production employing three different writers who all had different perspectives on where they wanted the story to go and then relying on director George Bloomfield to cram it all together, which he doesn’t succeed at. The result is a fragmented mishmash that takes a long while to become intriguing and even then, remains interesting only sporadically. Lots of extended scenes particularly at the beginning that should’ve been trimmed and a poor pacing that barely manages to create any momentum.

It doesn’t help that the main characters are wholly unlikable and uninteresting. Clark especially comes off as arrogant right from the beginning when we see her drive by what appears to be Amish people in a horse and buggy fighting through the snow and cold while she enjoys things in her warm ritzy car, which makes her seem detached and uncaring. The scene where she’s trying to procure an important real estate deal and then gets hampered by Michael playing loud music in the other room, so she then excuses herself and promises to be right back. I was fully expecting her to yell at Michael for his misbehavior, but instead she strips off her clothes and the two make love, but it seemed like sex should be the last thing on her mind during such an serious business meeting and what would happen if the clients, who were just a door away and waiting for her return, would walk in on them? 

Sarrazin doesn’t cut it either. I know he’s been lambasted by critics in his other film appearances for being too transparent and forgettable and yet I’ve usually defended him as I feel he can sometimes be effective even given the right material. Here though he falls precariously flat. Some of it is the fault of the writing which doesn’t lend him to create a character with any nuance, or likability, but in either case he’s a complete bore and the viewer isn’t emotionally invested in his predicament. His flashback moments where he sees himself in some sort of prisoner of war camp doesn’t make a lot of sense, or have much to do with the main plot, and seems like something for a whole different movie. 

On the other hand, Perkins is fantastic and the only thing that livens it up to the extent that he should’ve been given much more screen time as the film sinks whenever he’s not on. It’s great too at seeing SCTV alums like John Candy, Eugene Levy, Joe Flaherty, Dave Thomas, and Catherine O’Hara in small parts where with the exception of Candy they’re not comical but instead make a rare turn at being dramatic. Duff is kind of fun and has one great moment, really the only good one in the movie, where he gets trapped in an elevator and must escape being shot by Perkins, who has his arm lodged in the otherwise closed doors, by desperately running back and forth in the closed space that he’s given. Michael Ironside has a memorable bit too as a bar patron who becomes incensed at Sarrazin when he refuses to allow him to buy him a drink. 

Spoiler Alert!

The denouement just leaves more questions and fails to tie up the loose ends as intended. For one thing it shows Sarrazin as being the one who strangled his wife, which I had started to suspect a long while earlier, so it’s not a ‘shocking surprise’ like I think the filmmakers thought it would. It also has Perkins leaving the scene, as he was having an affair with the woman, and even briefly speaking to Clark who witnesses him going, so why he’d insist Clark needs to pay him hush money didn’t make much sense. Sure, he could still go to the police and say that it was Sarrazin that did it, but Perkins fingerprints were at the scene of the crime, so I’d think either way he’d get implicated, and Clark could come forward saying she was a witness who saw him leaving. If anything, Clark should’ve been pushing him to go to the cops versus bribing him to stay away.  

Also, the way it gets shown, Clark comes into the bedroom after Sarrazin has already strangled his wife, so all she sees is him weeping over his wife’s dead body. For all she knew, from that perspective, is that Perkins really did kill the woman and Sarrazin was simply the first to come upon her dead body and thus for it to be crystal clear Clark should’ve entered while he was still in the middle of the act versus when he was already done.

Beyond that is that question of why would Clark want to stay with someone she knew had such violent tendencies? Wouldn’t she be afraid he could get upset at some point and do that to her? Sarrazin even asks her at the very end if she is afraid and her only response is: ‘aren’t you’? This though only muddles things further cementing it as a botched effort. 

Alternate Title: Deadly Companion

My Rating: 4 out of 10

Released: May 12, 1980

Runtime: 1 Hour 36 Minutes

Director: George Bloomfield

Studio: Quadrant Films

Available: Amazon Video

Leave a comment

Posted in 80's Movies, Cold Climate/Wintertime Movies, Foreign Films, Movies Based on Novels, Movies from Canada, Mystery, Obscure Movies

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Straw Dogs (1971)

Posted on May 28, 2025 | 2 comments

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 8 out of 10

4-Word Review: Man defends his home.

David (Dustin Hoffman), a nerdy mathematician, has been given a research grant and uses it to relocate to the rural countryside of England with his wife Amy (Susan George). They move into a farmhouse that was once owned by Amy’s father and they hire four men (Del Henney, Ken Hutchinson, Jim Norton, Donald Webster) to fix up the roof. The men though don’t work much and spend most of the time making fun of David and ogling Amy. After several bad encounters, including the grizzly death of their pet cat, David fires them and hopes that’ll be the last it, but things only get worse. When a teen girl named Janice (Sally Thomsett) disappears her violently drunken father Tom (Peter Vaughan) thinks it was caused by Henry (David Warner) a mentally handicapped man that Janice had shown an affinity for. Tom, along with the four other men, become a lynch mob determined to find Henry and bring him some ‘street justice’. David and Amy, while returning from a church service, hit Henry with their car as he’s running from the other men. David agrees to take the injured Henry into his home until a doctor can arrive, but the five men insist on getting inside to beat and kill Henry for his perceived crime. Since David had avoided having any confrontation with the men previously even when they had openly mocked him, they presume he’ll be a pushover this time as well, but David has finally decided to take a stand and will defend his home from the intruders in any way he can. 

While it was controversial at the time many now consider this the pinnacle of director Sam Peckinpah’s career and his directorial touches are supreme. The capturing of the brown empty vast landscape of nothingness, shot during the winter of 1971, brings out a surreal sense making it seem like the characters are living in a purgatory outer world where everything is dead and helps explain the deadness of the men’s souls that have been forced to endure their entire lives there. The climactic sequence where David’s home comes under siege is deftly handled. Normally in thrillers pounding music gets played during these segments to ramp up the tension, but here there’s only the sound of a distance foghorn, which makes it much more creepy, distinct, and helps accentuate the isolation. 

Some have been critical of the film’s violence especially at the time when there was activism going on that tried to stymie violent material on both TV and movies with the idea that violence was a ‘learned’ behavior and if people didn’t see it so much in entertainment, then they wouldn’t do it in real life. Peckinpah though saw it differently as he felt violence was an instinctual reaction that couldn’t just be ‘unlearned’ and that in certain situations it was necessary and not every conflict could be resolved peacefully, a message the film brings out quite well. 

While Susan George gives an excellent performance, as do the four villainous men, particularly Vaughan as their ringleader making them some of the creepiest bad guys in film history, I did find her character confusing. I didn’t understand why she’d marry a guy that she found by her own admission cowardly even bringing up that he was ‘running away’ from problems he was having at his university and his ‘hiding behind his studies’ in order to avoid it. She also shows no respect for his work and several times even vandalizes his chalk board that has his mathematical equations, so what attracted her to him in the first place? Would’ve made more sense had she initially idolized him for his academic status and then became painfully aware of his meekness as the film progressed, which would’ve made for a more interesting arch.

Spoiler Alert!

The film is based on the 1969 novel The Siege of Trencher’s Farm by Gordon Williams, but with many changes some of which worked while others didn’t. In the novel the couple had an 8-year-old girl, but in the film there is no child. To a degree it doesn’t make that much of a difference though when the bad guys attack the house it might’ve heightened the urgency more knowing that David was not only defending his ‘home’, but also the safety of his terrified daughter. The biggest change that the film does is that it creates a connection between Henry and Janice where Janice sneaks away with him during a church party where she invites him to be intimate with her, but in the process, he accidentally kills her, which seemed too similar to Of Mice and Men. It’s confusing too why this teen girl, who outside of her buck teeth seems reasonably attractive, would feel the need to throw herself at a mentally handicapped man, or get flirty with David, who is married. Why can’t she find guys her own age to fool around with? Knowing the hormones of most teen boys that shouldn’t be too hard, so without further explanation to her psyche, which doesn’t happen, her ‘inviting’ of Henry is quite unnatural and forced. 

In the book Henry is instead a child killer who’s being transported back to prison when the vehicle he’s in gets stuck in the snow, which allows him to escape. At the same time Janice, who’s mentally disabled, which isn’t made clear in the movie, runs away from a Christmas party where she ends up dying from the exposure to the cold, but otherwise it has nothing to do with the escape of Henry and is only presumed to have a connection by the five men, which makes more sense and the screenplay should’ve have kept it this way.

On the other hand, in the book none of the attacking men die and are only badly injured, but I think death gives it a more final resolution, so the movie scores there. I also liked how David is forced to resort to items he can find around the house, much like in the film Last House on the Left, which came out a year later, to fight off the bad guys versus the cliched machoism of having a big gun to blow them away and it also helps to show how intellectual wits can ultimately be used to overpower the otherwise physically stronger attackers. 

The rape scene in which the wife gets assaulted by not only one, but two men was another problematic moment as the book had no such segment. For one thing it makes it seem like she’s actually enjoying the attack, at least with the first one, and she recovers from it much too quickly and doesn’t even bother to tell David about it and able to go on relatively normally afterwards, which didn’t seem realistic and thus I think it should’ve been excised since it comes off as exploitive and doesn’t have that much to do with the main plot. 

My Rating: 8 out of 10

Released: December 22, 1971

Runtime: 1 Hour 57 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Sam Peckinpah

Studio: 20th Century Fox

Available: DVD, Blu-ray (Criterion Collection)

2 Comments

Posted in 70's Movies, Classic, Cold Climate/Wintertime Movies, Movies Based on Novels, Movies with a rural setting, Movies with Nudity, Thrillers/Suspense

Tagged , , , , , ,

Revenge of the Pink Panther (1978)

Posted on May 5, 2025 | Leave a comment

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 6 out of 10

4-Word Review: Out to get Clouseau.

Philippe (Robert Webber) is a successful businessman who’s secretly the head of the French criminal underground. Some though are questioning his leadership considering him to be too weak to remain in that position. In order to squash the impending threat, he decides to make a bold move by having Inspector Clouseau (Peter Sellers) killed. Clouseau was considered a master detective by the outside world and only known to be an incompetent by those who worked with him, so by having him out of the way the drug dealers would feel relieved and thus Philippe would remain in power. However, things don’t get as planned as Clouseau manages to miraculously evade all attempts on his life. The media though mistakenly announces that he has died, which allows Clouseau to go undercover along with his manservant Cato (Burt Kwouk) to find out who’s after him.

This marked the fifth entry in the series and is probably the funniest. Initially director Blake Edwards had wanted to reuse footage that had been cut from the previous entry and then film new scenes around those, but star Sellers insisted he wanted an all-new story and that was probably for the best. Sellers by far gets the most laughs whereas in the one that came before this, The Pink Panther Strikes Again, it was Herbert Lom as the unhinged Dreyfus, that was the most memorable, but here his part becomes much more benign, though he still gets one good scene where he tries not to breakout laughing while giving a eulogy at Clouseau’s funeral. Sellers though comes out on top here especially in his disguises like when he pretends to be a sea captain with an inflatable parrot on his shoulder, or in a hilarious send-up as a Mafia Don.

It’s great to see Kwouk, who was usually relegated to the ‘fight’ scene between him and his boss Clouseau, become more involved in the story, as the two go to Hong Kong in disguise to track down the bad guys. Dyan Cannon is a refreshing change of pace. Usually, the women in these films were young models whose sole purpose was to allude sex appeal, but here she’s middle-aged, but still attractive, and shows much more of a feisty personality. She helps build a strong secondary character and is better interwoven into the plot versus simply appearing as a potential romantic interest.

Webber though as the main villain is a detriment. I have no doubt that the notoriously insecure Sellers didn’t like the way Lom stole the film as the nemesis in their last outing and wanted to make sure that didn’t happen again. Not only is the Dreyfuss character far more neutered, but so is Webber making him seem like he’s almost sleepwalking through his role. It would’ve been more interesting had his character has some personal vendetta against Clouseau, possibly because it was Clouseau who had sent him, or one of his men to jail, and now he wanted revenge. Just having him out to get Clousau because it might bolster his own image didn’t seem to be enough of an incentive and the two, outside of one comic moment where Clouseau’s is in one of disguises, never have any ultimate confrontation. Watching him get chased around his desk and cower from Dyan Cannon may have been intended as funny, but it just further erodes his villainy making him seem even more impotent than he already is. Even a comedy still needs a bad guy that can elicit some tension and this one doesn’t.

The implementation of Mr. Chong, played by martial arts instructor Ed Parker, has potential. Supposedly he’s an ‘invincible’ fighter that can beat-up anyone and not be stopped as proven when he takes down several other men while in Webber’s office but then he gets comically defeated once he comes into contact with Clouseau. While watching him go through the floor/ceiling of several apartments below as he crash lands is visually funny it would’ve been more engaging if he had come back at some point and continued his relentless attack on Clouseau albeit with injuries in order to reclaim his reputation that he couldn’t be defeated, but in the process just became more hurt and ineffective.

Spoiler Alert!

The climactic sequence that occurs in Hong Kong is a cop-out and comes-off like they’d run out of ideas, so they tried to save it with a calamity filled chase that plays more like a cartoon, or something better suited for a live action Disney movie. Introducing yet another Mafia boss, this one played by Paul Stewart, makes things too cluttered and there should’ve been just one main bad guy that was the boss of everyone. The finale inside a firecracker factory should’ve proven dangerous and in fact we do see the entire place explode from a distance and yet everyone comes out of it unscathed, which doesn’t exactly make a lot of sense.

My Rating: 6 out of 10

Released: July 20, 1978

Runtime: 1 Hour 39 Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Blake Edwards

Studio: United Artists

Available: DVD, Amazon Video, YouTube

Leave a comment

Posted in 70's Movies, Farce, Gangster Movies, Movies for the Whole Family, Sequels

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

The Pink Panther Strikes Again (1976)

Posted on May 1, 2025 | 2 comments

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 7 out of 10

4-Word Review: Clouseau battles doomsday weapon.

Dreyfuss (Herbert Lom) has been informed by his psychiatrist (Geoffrey Bayldon) that he has been cured of his obsession with Clouseau (Peter Sellers) and now deemed sane. He’ll be recommending his release from the mental institution he’s been in later that day at the sanity board of which Dreyfuss is elated. However, Clouseau shows up unannounced planning on speaking to the sanity board on behalf of Dreyfuss, but when he gets there the two meet and after several mishaps, all inadvertently caused by Clouseau, occur it sends Dreyfuss spiraling back into insanity. He then though is able to escape and goes on a mission to kill Clouseau, first on his own and then with the help of several worldwide assassins. When this doesn’t go as planned, he kidnaps a nuclear physicist (Richard Vernon) and blackmails him to create a doomsday weapon that can take out entire buildings with its laser beam and which Dreyfuss has no problem using against the world unless he’s given Clouseau in return.

After the unexpected success of The Return of the Pink Panther, director Blake Edwards was given an immediate green light to write and direct a follow-up. Since he had originally intended for this to be a TV-series he used one of the scripts he had written for that one and expanded it for feature film length. The original cut came out to 126 minutes, but the studio insisted it be trimmed to 95-minute runtime with the excised scenes being used as material for the Curse of the Pink Panther, which released 6 years later after the passing of star Sellers.

Despite constant behind-the-scenes struggles between Edwards and Sellers this film is widely considered their best output second only to The Party, which they collaborated on 8 years earlier. A lot of the reason why it works is the excellent pacing with an almost rapid-fire collage of jokes and mishaps, the scenic European locations and the pleasing yet still bouncy Henry Mancini score.

The humor hits the target in almost all cases, unlike most comedies where there’s usually a few misses, with some of the best moments coming from the supporting players like stuntman Dick Crokett who plays a perfect parody of then President Gerald Ford and Lesley Ann-Down, who replaced Maude Adams who was originally cast, but then fired after she refused to appear nude, as a Russian spy whose attempts to get Clouseau in bed with her proves quite funny. The ongoing confrontations between Lom and Sellers though are still the highlights and the two really work well together with Lom’s angry abrasiveness a nice contrast to Seller’s benign ineptness and in fact this is a rare instance where Sellers gets upstaged as it’s Lom’s performance with his over-the-top villainy that you come away remembering the most after it’s over.

Yet with all of its successes the script is still full of logical loopholes and missing key moments. For instance, Dreyfuss escapes from the mental hospital, but it’s never shown, which I felt since it’s so integral to the storyline needed to be seen and explaining how he was able to do it. What he did to gain access to the apartment downstairs from Clouseau’s should’ve been inserted as well and some sort of answers for how he was able to avoid injury from the bomb going off as it destroyed Clouseau’s apartment and the fallout from it would’ve most assuredly affected the apartment beneath it as well. Clouseau’s ongoing physical confrontations with his house servant Kato (Burt Kwouk) becomes problematic too as they’re constantly damaging the furniture during their fights and if this happens every time he comes home then the furniture should already be in disarray from their last battle as there wouldn’t have been time to have cleaned it up and replaced it with new stuff.

Spoiler Alert!

While the film does at least have Dreyfuss masterminding a major bank heist, which helps to explain how he got funding to build the giant laser and purchase the castle that he and his crew move into, it still makes it seem that they’re able to build the elaborate weapon and all the computers that go along with it, almost overnight, which of course isn’t believable. It also at one point has the laser beam striking Lom making his legs disappear, but he’s still able to somehow walk around anyways as well as maintain his same height, making it seem that his legs are still there and simply invisible.

There’s also the issue of Dreyfuss disappearing at the end, due to the effects of the laser, but in the following installment, Revenge of the Pink Panther, he’s fully intact and no mention of his previous madness to destroy the world. Fans of the series say this is because this whole film was meant to be a dream that Dreyfuss had, which would’ve made a lot of sense. He was already obsessed with Clouseau, so having nightmares about things one is constantly focused on would be logical and the film should’ve had at the very end Dryefuss waking up and still in a strait-jacket, but it doesn’t making it an oversight and not properly thought through.

My Rating: 7 out of 10

Released: December 15, 1976

Runtime: 1 Hour 43 Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Blake Edwards

Studio: United Artists

Available: DVD, Amazon Video, YouTube

2 Comments

Posted in 70's Movies, Campy Comedy, Sequels

Tagged , , , , , , ,

The Return of the Pink Panther (1975)

Posted on April 27, 2025 | Leave a comment

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 7 out of 10

4-Word Review: Tracking down stolen diamond.

Inspector Clouseau (Peter Sellers) has been demoted to street cop by Chief Inspector Dreyfuss (Herbert Lom) due to Clouseau’s continual incompetence, which is starting to drive Dreyfuss completely mad. However, inside the country of Lugash a prized diamond known as the Pink Panther is stolen and since Clouseau had success retrieving it the first time it went missing during a heist he is put on the case to find it again much to Dreyfuss annoyance. Clouseau suspects that the culprit is Charles Litton (Christopher Plummer), who is a notorious thief. Clouseau attempts to use several different disguises in order to infiltrate Litton’s home that he shares with his wife Claudine (Catherin Schell) in order to find incriminating evidence against Litton so that he can turn him in, but his attempts to try and a take Litton down prove to be comically inept. 

This marked the fourth installment of the Pink Panther series and the first in 10-years that reunited writer/director Blake Edwards with Sellers. Both had said after doing the second film A Shot in the Dark, that they never wanted to work with the other again due to much infighting during the production, but both had since then fallen on hard times. Edwards was by the early 70’s considered box office poison after the colossal failure of Darling Lilli which managed to recoup a measly $3 million from a $25 million budget and his other films from that era Wild Rovers and The Carey Treatment hadn’t done much better. Since Pink Panther had been his last success, he was interested in reviving it and even wrote up a 14-page treatment but found no takers amongst the major studios. Then producer Lew Grade agreed to finance it in exchange for Edward’s wife Julie Andrews agreeing to star in a British TV-special that he wanted to produce. Since Sellers career had also bottomed out, he came onboard to most everyone’s surprise without much hassle.

The film was shot in many scenic locations including Morrocco giving the optics an exotic flair and the proceedings a sophisticated European vibe making it seem like a step-up from just a silly comedy. In the first two installments all the characters were written to be funny and goofy particularly the second film, which had been based on a stage play. Here though the comedy is wisely given over to Sellers while the couple he’s after remain savvy, which makes it more intriguing as you want to see how this inept idiot takes them down, or is able to trip them up at their own game. I also liked how funny bits are interspliced with some legitimate action, especially the opening scene that features the heist, which could’ve easily fit into a realistic film dealing with a robbery. These moments help add a bit of relief from all the laughs, a sort of chance to catch your breath, while making the plot seem like it’s not just all about being a farce.

Lom adds terrific support as Clouseau’s exasperated supervisor, and his assertive acting style works nicely off of Sellers clownish one making the interplay between the two a highlight. It’s good too that Plummer replaced David Niven, who played the character in the first one, but wasn’t able to do it here due to scheduling conflicts, as Niven would’ve been too old and not plausible to have outrun the bad guys like Plummer does. 

My only issue is that Claudine is shown attempting to hold in her laughter at Clouseau right from the start like she knows he’s an idiot before she even met him, but this goes against the premise. Clouseau is considered an accomplished detective by the outside world hence why he was selected to head the case and it’s only the people that work with him and know him who are aware of his ineptness. This is the whole reason why Dreyfuss gets driven mad by him because the rest of the world celebrates the man that he knows is really a fool, so Claudine should’ve initially thought of him as being sharp and only came to the conclusion he was incompetent by the end after having dealt with him. It actually would’ve been funnier had she and Charles feared Clouseau upfront having believed his celebrated reputation and misreading his bumbling as being ‘genius’ ploys and remained that way throughout. In either case seeing her covering her mouth and shielding her giggles makes almost seem like she’s falling out of character and a blooper, similar to how Harvey Korman would unintentionally crack-up during Tim Conway’s antics on the ‘The Carol Burnett Show’ and for that reason it should’ve been avoided. 

My Rating: 7 out of 10

Released: May 21, 1975

Runtime: 1 Hour 54 Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Blake Edwards

Studio: United Artists

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

Leave a comment

Posted in 70's Movies, Farce, Heist Movies, Movies for the Whole Family, Movies with a Hotel setting, Mystery, Sequels

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Real Genius (1985)

Posted on April 21, 2025 | Leave a comment

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 6 out of 10

4-Word Review: House full of popcorn.

Mitch (Gabriel Jarret) is a 15-year-old prodigy who attends college at a young age and rooms with Chris (Val Kilmer). The two though don’t hit-it-off as Chris is rebellious and irreverent while Mitch takes his studies seriously but doesn’t know how to have any fun. Both are assigned to work on a project called ‘Crossbow’ that is headed by an arrogant Professor Jerry Hathway (William Atherton). Neither student realizes that the laser project has been commissioned by the CIA that will allow them to commit political assassinations from outer space. Once they find this out, they band together to infiltrate the headquarters in order to corrupt the weapon and not allow it to function properly.

The film is best known as being the second starring vehicle for Val Kilmer who plays the type of smart ass that some may find amusing while others could consider it obnoxious. While he does have his moments, I did find it hard to believe that he was ever the studious type, which he insists he was during a ‘heart-to-heart’ conversation with Mitch and only became the goof-off after burnout, but if that really were the case the viewer should’ve seen that versus having it described. Since he plays the party personality so well it’s hard to imagine him being any other way and it would’ve been interesting to have witnessed the transition.

The real star is Mitch, and I’m surprised why he wasn’t given top billing as he’s more three dimensional, relatable, and has a genuine character arch while Kilmer seems brought in mainly just for comic relief and throw some spice into the proceedings. Atheron is a major scene-stealer that almost knocks the other two out playing the snobby jerk of all jerks, in an even more pronounced way than in Ghostbusters, which I didn’t think could be topped and in fact he plays it so well you don’t see the acting and begin to wonder if that’s the way he really is and in his case start to fear being potentially typecast.

While these characters are all engaging in their unique ways the supporting cast doesn’t work as well. Mitch’s parents, played by Paul Tuller and Joanne Baron, are just too dumb to be believed particularly when Atherton asks in snarky fashion if their son is adopted and for them not to catch-on that he’s insulting them was for me not plausible. Jordan, played by Michelle Meyrink, I felt was a bit over-the-top as she’s this super nerdy girl who spends seemingly every waking moment working on her inventions making it almost like it was a compulsion and it would’ve been nice seeing, at least for a few seconds, her doing something else.

The way Mitch, who has a crush on her, and she consummate their fledgling relationship gets completely botched. For one thing it didn’t need to turn sexual as I thought it worked better having things evolve between them slowly and not have it get serious until after school year was over and they could focus less on their studying. Either way the genesis that motivates them into sex is when Sherry, played by Patti D’Arbanville, appears in his dorm room and comes-on to him, but there’s no explanation for why she’s there and just popped-in out-of-the-blue. What’s worse is that you never actually see Mitch and Jordan get-it-on as the film cuts away, but seeing them in bed under the covers struggle to do it, as the first time could be quite awkward for many young people, could’ve been comical exposing how these geniuses were dumb at something to the point they decide it’s not worth it.

The pranks, which the film is best known for, are amusing, but seem a bit exaggerated. Coating the dorm floors with ice would cause massive damage once it melted and the water seeped through the floorboards making me believe the pranksters would’ve been kicked out. Same with Kilmer breaking one of the windows in his dorm room, which in the next scene is fixed, but no explanation with who fixed it, or more importantly paid for it. Getting the car of one of the students inside a dorm room was for me a jump-the-shark moment as there was simply no way that vehicle frame would’ve been able to fit through the doorway. Some may argue that because these pranks were based on real incidents that had occurred in other colleges, I’m being overly picky complaining about them, but I suspect they weren’t carried out in the exact same way as shown here, nor is there anything said about the aftermath because once the jokes are over somebody’s going to be paying for it. Here nobody ever gets into trouble or deals with the consequences, but in real-life they would.

Spoiler Alert!

The ending in which the students are able to infiltrate a military complex was wish fulfillment particularly the way they’re able to get in using ID cards they had made themselves, which I’m pretty sure would not have passed professional scrutiny. Just because these kids are smart doesn’t mean they can’t make mistakes or have oversights.

I did however love the house getting filled up with popcorn. Actual popcorn was used and had to be popped continuously for three months and then treated with a fire retardant so as not to combust. A 2009 episode of Mythbusters tried to recreate it and found that it wouldn’t be possible as the popcorn was not able to break glass or knock the home off of its foundation like in the movie, but it’s still a fun sight regardless and the film’s top moment.

My Rating: 6 out of 10

Released: August 7, 1985

Runtime: 1 Hour 46 Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Martha Coolidge

Studio: Tri-Star Pictures

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, 4K, Amazon Video, YouTube

Leave a comment

Posted in 80's Movies, Black Comedy, College Life, Sci-Fi

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Adventures of the Wilderness Family 3 (1979)

Posted on April 17, 2025 | Leave a comment

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 1 out of 10

4-Word Review: Government threatens their home.

After surviving their first harsh mountain winter the Robinson family (Robert Logan, Susan Damante Shaw, Heather Rattray, Ham Larsen) are happy to go outdoors and enjoy the warmer weather of Spring, but there’s an unexpected problem. While doing a survey of the area a Forest Ranger (William Bryant) has surmised that the family doesn’t have rights to the property that they’re on. They must prove it’s a legitimate mining claim or move out.

I’ll give this film some credit, at least initially, that they made an attempt, albeit a feeble one, to mix things up. I was fully expecting more animal attacks, the formula had one occurring every 15-minutes in the first two installments, but with the exception of one minor one that happens to the boy when he runs away from home, there really isn’t any, at least to the family members. There is however, a confrontation between some mountain lions and the family’s pet dog, but the dog is able to fight them off, though I started to wonder how many times he could keep doing this. In the first two films the dog was also instrumental in scaring the other wildlife away, but you would think a domesticated pet would be at a disadvantage to one that had been living in the wild all their lives and were bigger in size. The fact that the dog constantly survives these battles and never even gets injured starts to raise the implausibility meter.

The two kids also feud a bit, which I found refreshing. Even the Brady Bunch had some conflicts between the siblings, as most any normal family does, so seeing everyone here be peachy towards each other the majority of the time is not only boring, but unrealistic. However, their disagreement, which amounts to nothing more than the two not talking to each other, which we don’t even see, but have described by the two parents, doesn’t last for more than a few minutes and then it’s all back to ‘happy family’. 

The mom finally does go back to L.A., something she had lightly threatened to do in the first two films but just like with the kids fighting it doesn’t add up to much as she comes back and says she’ll never leave again. Why then even add these elements if by the end it makes no difference to the story?

On a lesser note, are the bear cubs residing in the family’s cabin who never seem to grow and if anything, appear to have gotten smaller than when they were in Part 2. The Boomer character played by George ‘Buck’ Flower is also an issue as he’s a mountain man but never carries a gun making you wonder how he survives without one. For instance, how does he protect himself as animal attacks happen a lot, at least with the family, and what does he use to hunt for food? Maybe he lives completely off of berries and fish, but by the looks of his protruding belly it appears he’s eating something more.

Out of everything it’s the music that’s the worst. Because the story is so thin there are several segments featuring the family frolicking around while this sappy chorus by studio musicians get played that’s so sugary it’ll give you diabetes just by listening to it. It also has a dated sound from the 1940’s. The 70’s though was a period of many interesting music genres like rock, disco, soul, and even southern rock and media aimed at kids was trying to replicate it like ‘Sesame Street’ that had the Pointer Sisters singing a song that teaches children to count, but with a funky beat. Even religious people got into the times by introducing Christian Rock, so why does this movie have a soundtrack that’s so grossly out-of-step?

Spoiler Alert!

The third act in which the family openly refuses to leave their home after the Forest Ranger insists proves to be a letdown too as there’s no tense confrontation. Instead, the Ranger’s helicopter mysteriously crashes for no reason as the weather was sunny and when the family nurses him back to health he agrees to no longer push them out. However, all it would take is another government official to come along and the conflict would start all over making the tidy wrap-up/resolution unconvincing. The only positive thing to say is this was thankfully the final film of the series.

My Rating: 1 out of 10

Released: November 21, 1979

Runtime: 1 Hour 40 Minutes

Rated G

Director: Jack Couffer

Studio: Pacific International Enterprises

Available: DVD, Amazon Video, Roku

Leave a comment

Posted in 70's Movies, Movies for the Whole Family, Movies with a rural setting, Outdoors, Sequels

Tagged , , , , , ,

You’ll Like My Mother (1972)

Posted on April 13, 2025 | Leave a comment

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 3 out of 10

4-Word Review: Pregnant woman held captive.

Francesca (Patty Duke) travels by bus to Duluth, Minnesota in order to meet her mother-in-law (Rosemary Murphy) after her husband dies in a plane crash in Vietnam leaving her alone and pregnant. When she arrives, she finds the woman to be cold and indifferent unlike how her husband had described her where he always insisted that ‘you’ll like my mother’. Francesca also finds out that he apparently had a sister, a mute girl named Kathleen (Sian Barbara Allen) that he had never mentioned. A snowstorm blocks her from leaving forcing her to stay in an upstairs bedroom where more troubling secrets come out including the fact that a young man named Kenny (Richard Thomas) is secretly residing in the home and has been accused in the past of being a serial rapist.

Blah thriller based on the 1969 novel of the same name by Naomi A. Hintze. The only interesting aspect about the film is that it was shot on-location at the Glensheen Historic Estate, which 5 years later became the site of a real-life crime when the mansion’s owner, Elisabeth Congdon and her nurse, were murdered by her son-in-law. The movie also marks the debut of Sian Barbara Allen, who died just recently and was quite active in TV and movies during the 70’s before retiring in 1990 in order to focus full-time on being an activist. She was, particularly in her prime, a great beauty with the most mesmerizing pair of blue eyes you’ll ever see. Unfortunately, her role doesn’t have her saying much outside of a few words she manages to mumble out and her character seems to be put in simply to help the protagonist figure out the mystery.

The story unfolds slowly and because the majority of it takes place in one building it becomes visually static. Since it was filmed in Minnesota during the winter the white stuff on the ground is real, which helps with the authenticity, but because it didn’t actually snow when it was being shot the crew was forced to use fake falling flakes in a feeble attempt to replicate a snowstorm, which they’re not able to pull off. Anyone who’s ever experience a real blizzard will see how tacky this one looks and thus the premise that ‘nobody can get through this storm’ is lost.

Patty Duke is good, but her character doesn’t do much outside of staying cooped up in room while Allen does most of the leg work. Her insistence that she didn’t need any help financially makes you wonder then why did she come at all? If it was just for a visit, she could’ve done that in the summer when Minnesota weather is more hospitable and after the baby was born. In many ways having her in need of money would’ve made more sense and heightened the dramatic tension since that would make her desperate with nowhere else to turn.

Murphy is a weak villain as half the time she’s more nervous than Duke and easily fooled making it seem that anyone could outfox her and get away. It doesn’t help that she stupidly gives away who she really is and why she’s there when she has a conversation with Thomas that gets overheard by Duke, which ruins the mystery when the film is only halfway through and thus killing what moderate intrigue there had been.

The foot chase through the snow at the end does offer some tension but waiting all the way until the finale for any action was a mistake and Duke should’ve tried to escape earlier. The plot twists aren’t enough to make sitting through worth it. It’s not adequate material for a 90-minute feature length film as there’s 30-minute episodes of the old ‘Alfred Hitchcock Presents’ with more plot wrinkles than what you get here.

My Rating: 3 out of 10

Released: October 13, 1972

Runtime: 1 Hour 33 Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Lamont Johnson

Studio: Universal Pictures

Available: DVD (Warner Archive)

Leave a comment

Posted in 70's Movies, Cold Climate/Wintertime Movies, Movies Based on Novels, Mystery, Thrillers/Suspense

Tagged , , , , , , ,

The Conversation (1974)

Posted on April 10, 2025 | 2 comments

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 10 out of 10

4-Word Review: Someone is listening in.

Harry Caul (Gene Hackman) is a surveillance expert who specializes in listening into people’s private conversations and has a reputation of being quite good at it. Many wealthy clients hire him to record things from their enemies that they might not be able to attain otherwise. However, one of these assignments led to the death of three people and Harry, being a highly religious man, has felt guilty about it ever since. He begins to have the same concerns with his new assignment when he overhears a couple (Fredric Forrest, Cindy Williams) who he’s recording mention that ‘he’d kill us if he got the chance’. Harry is unsure if he wants to give the tapes up to his client as he’s frightened the same scenario as before will occur. Martin (Harrison Ford) the man representing the client becomes aggressive in getting the tapes and warns Harry that they’ll get their hands on them one way or the other. Harry, a private man, soon realizes that this client is just as sophisticated in surveillance technology as he and maybe even more so as he becomes aware that his phone and even his apartment is bugged.

Inspired by real-life surveillance expert Martin Kaiser, who was a technical consultant on the production, the film deftly explores how today’s modern technology has easily evaded our private lives and how no one is safe from prying eyes and ears a concern that has become even more pronounced in the decades following its release. Many presumed that it was a testament about the Watergate break-in, which occurred a year before the movie came-out and uses much of the same sound equipment used the by criminals in the real-life event, but in actuality the script, by Francis Ford Coppola, was already complete in 1965, but was unable to get any financial backing until his success with The Godfather. 

The film scores on just about all levels especially with the way it captures San Francisco. I loved the bird’s eye-opening shot of Union Square as well as the terrific use of the fog that gets used to great effect during a memorable dream sequence. The soundtrack by David Shire is quite unique as it’s made to replicate sound waves changing frequency. I liked too that quite a bit of time is spent showing Harry inside his editing studio where he puts together the tape he’s recorded from different sources into a cohesive whole and watching him do it, even if it’s from equipment that would be deemed dated now, is impressive and makes you appreciate the expertise of the character.

Acting wise this may be Hackman’s best, and he stated in later interviews that he considers this to be his finest work, though at the time he felt it was an extreme challenge playing such an introverted person when he himself was highly extroverted, but the payoff is rewarding as he displays characteristics unlike any other role he’s played. What impressed me most was his body posture, which is hunched over, and he walks with a pensive gait, which reveals to the viewer the character’s inner angst without it ever having to be verbally explained. It’s interesting too how he’s mostly shy and stand offish during the majority of it making him seem like a wallflower, but when the subject of his sound expertise comes into discussion, he’s suddenly bragging about his state-of-the-art machinery showing how even the most unassuming of people can still have a big ego and helping to create a protagonist who’s three-dimensional.

There’s also great support from a young Harrison Ford, who appears with a scar on his chin, who despite presenting himself in a composed manner and speaking in a controlled tone of voice is quite menacing. Terri Garr is excellent as a prostitute that Harry frequents and acts as Harry’s only social outlet as well as Allen Garfield playing a huckster whose also Harry’s rival and clearly has a way about him that gets under his skin. Great work too by John Cazale who works as Harry’s assistant and their relationship runs hot-and-cold and there’s even Robert Duvall in a small, but pivotal part.

Spoiler Alert!

While the film is expertly crafted, I did find the scene where Harry’s landlady leaves him a birthday gift inside his apartment to be problematic. We see that Harry has three different locks on his door, which keenly reveals what a private person he is and how paranoid he is to protect it, and yet when he opens up his door there’s an item sitting on the floor left by his landlord. Through a subsequent phone conversation, he has with her we learn that she was able to get in by using her master key, but it’s highly unlikely that she would have three different keys for each lock.

Another issue happens at the end when Harry tears his apartment apart in desperate attempt to find the covert listening device that’s been planted by the client and is able to listen and record everything he says and does. He isn’t able to locate it despite a thorough and exhaustive search and then spends the rest of the time playing his saxophone as it’s the only thing he has left, which is where it finally dawned on me that was probably where they implanted the bug and the movie should’ve had him dismantle that too and then if he was unable to find it there, after destroying everything else, he could be seen lying in the barren, darkened room in a fetal position and completely defeated, which might’ve left an even more lasting and riveting final image.

My Rating: 10 out of 10

Released: April 7, 1974

Runtime: 1 Hour 53 Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Francis Ford Coppola

Studio: Paramount Pictures

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

2 Comments

Posted in 70's Movies, Classic, Thrillers/Suspense

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,