FilmFanatic.org

Synopsis:
A pair of middle-aged men (Ernest Borgnine and Carroll O’Connor) fed up with the rampant crime in their city join an auxiliary police force.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Black Comedy
• Ernest Borgnine Films
• New York City
• Police

Review:
Based on the intriguing premise of ordinary citizens who become so fed up with the unresolved crime in their city that they decided to become deputized volunteer policemen (who knew such a possibility even existed?!), this uneven black comedy ultimately fails to deliver on its thematic potential. As in his American debut film, Born to Win (1971), Czech director Ivan Passer can’t quite seem to decide whether he wants to make an outright farce (as in the opening scenes, with various criminal acts being comedically carried out in broad daylight) or offer a more serious character study about blue collar men longing for some sense of authority and control in their lives.

Indeed, the film is frustratingly skimpy on details about what exactly goes into the duties and responsibilities of a volunteer policeman. The two central protagonists and their cronies are shown simply basking in the glory and fun of police accoutrement — uniforms and weapons and vehicles with sirens — rather than undergoing any kind of serious training. And once they do start patrolling the streets, we’re only shown a few instances of the types of dilemmas and situations they might encounter (including one particularly annoying “running gag” involving a young man who insists on drawling “f*** you” to every authority figure he encounters; not funny or insightful at all).

Instead, the screenplay shifts its meandering focus onto the midlife crises of Borgnine and O’Connor, good friends who are both unhappy (to varying degrees) in their jobs. Borgnine is a hairdresser with a dwindling clientele and an obnoxious employee (Karen Black, giving a weird, ineffective caricature of a performance); O’Connor is a taxi driver who longs to own his own business, and feels deep regret over lost opportunities in the past. Yet for every scene that provides an authentic glimpse into these characters’ lives — i.e., O’Connor taking his wife to the diner he desperately hopes to purchase — there are countless others that feel either random or misguided.

One of the film’s most awkwardly handled moments, for instance, shows O’Connor’s teenage daughter (Leslie Ackerman) — who has just been “attacked” on the street — berated by O’Connor for wearing a sexy shirt; a group of women sitting around the table (presumably all neighbors; we’re never told) proceed to advise her to wear a bra so her breasts don’t start to sag. The next time we see this girl, she’s out on the street with her sleazy boyfriend (Lionel Pina), looking for all the world like a prostitute. What’s the connection here? We’re not told. It’s narrative flaws like this that eventually detract from what seems to be Passer’s primary (worthy) goal: a desire to portray the motivations, disappointments, and daily challenges of working class life in New York.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Ernest Borgnine as Cy
  
• Willie’s “diner scene” with his wife
  

Must See?
No; feel free to skip this one.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Original Review
• Spinning Image Review
• Time Out Capsule Review

Synopsis:
A heroin addict (George Segal) begins a romance with a woman (Karen Black) whose car he attempts to steal; meanwhile, he tries to secure his next fix while outsmarting his dealer (Hector Elizondo).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Alcoholism and Drug Addiction
• George Segal Films
• Karen Black Films
• Paula Prentiss Films
• Robert De Niro Films

Review:
Czech New Wave director Ivan Passer’s American film debut was this uneven portrayal of the vagaries of heroin addiction in New York. Shaggy-haired George Segal tries his best but is ultimately unable to generate much interest in his character, given that “J” is all the typical things you’d expect from a heroin addict — self-absorbed, pathetic — and thus not really all that sympathetic.

He whines that nothing ever goes right for him in life, but why should it? Meanwhile, everything about his new relationship with Karen Black’s “Parm” feels contrived, starting from the moment she stupidly picks him up in her own car as he’s attempting to hijack it (hello? how DUMB can you get?).

She insists almost immediately that she’s really “into him”, yet there’s absolutely no reason why she should be; while there’s potential here for portraying an interesting relationship between an addict and a non-addict who’s desperately curious about the life of drug use (Panic in Needle Park, anyone?), that’s merely hinted at rather than exploited fully.

There are a few cleverly bizarre scenes throughout that elevate one’s interest temporarily, and show evidence of Passer’s absurdist sensibility: Segal attempting (unsuccessfully) to hide from a cop in a laundromat:

… and Segal attempting (successfully) to escape from the clutches of some drug dealers through creative flashing.

But ultimately, by the end of this inevitably bleak story, the main point one has taken away is that the world of drug addiction and dealing is brutally dog-eat-dog — not exactly an earth-shattering revelation.

Note: Robert De Niro has all of maybe 10 minutes of screentime in a tiny role as one of two cops shadowing Segal:

When the film went into public domain and random copies were produced for sale on DVD, De Niro’s face was marketed to fill the entire cover, leading would-be viewers (presumably De Niro fans) down the garden-path. Paula Prentiss has just as little screentime; she’s believable if underused as Segal’s sorry sack of an ex-wife.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Several original, darkly humorous scenes

Must See?
No; feel free to skip this one unless you’re curious. Listed as a Sleeper in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• Roger Ebert’s Review
• NY Times Original Review

Synopsis:
A stubborn teenager (Kim Darby) hires an alcoholic marshal (John Wayne) to track down and kill her father’s murderer (Jeff Corey).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Dennis Hopper Films
• Fugitives
• Henry Hathaway Films
• John Wayne Films
• Robert Duvall Films
• Search
• Strong Females
• Westerns

Review:
As the film which earned John Wayne his one and only Oscar, True Grit has remained an historically important movie for years; it’s now garnered renewed attention given the recent remake by the Coen brothers. Fortunately, both adaptations of Charles Portis’s cult 1968 novel are satisfying (if tonally diverse) westerns which complement rather than compete with each other. Twenty-year-old Kim Darby made an impressive cinematic debut in this earlier version as 14-year-old Mattie Ross, an intelligent, plucky teen determined to avenge her father’s murder at any cost; she has more spunk and “grit” than just about any comparable heroine in movies at the time. Indeed, it’s so unusual to see a young woman in the kind of adventurous role afforded to Darby that this novelty alone keeps us glued to the screen; we’re in constant suspense about what will befall Mattie and her compatriots next.

Wayne, for his part, is eminently memorable as drunken, one-eyed Rooster Cogburn, a lawman beyond his prime who nonetheless is exactly the man-for-hire Mattie aims to secure. He and Darby have such fine rapport together on-screen that it’s astonishing to learn he hated working with her, and considered her a poor actress. Their final scene together is particularly touching. As La Boeuf, the Texas Ranger who accompanies Cogburn and Mattie on their quest, country singer Glen Campbell, rounds out the odd trio nicely; he won a Golden Globe nomination as Most Promising Newcomer (though his film career never really took off). Meanwhile, Lucien Ballard’s expansive cinematography is consistently a widescreen treat to behold, and Marguerite Roberts’ screenplay is smart and literate, full of plenty of memorable dialogue. Watch for Robert Duvall and Dennis Hopper in small roles as gangster Ned Pepper and his henchman, Moon; they’re both quietly menacing.

Note: This film was followed in 1975 by Rooster Cogburn, an original sequel starring Wayne and Katharine Hepburn (though it’s not listed in Peary’s book, and I haven’t seen it, so I can’t vouch for it — yet — as any kind of Missing Title).

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Kim Darby as Mattie
  
• John Wayne as Rooster Cogburn (nominated by Peary in Alternate Oscars as Best Actor of the Year)
  
• Lucien Ballard’s cinematography
  
• Enjoyable dialogue:
  

  “I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!”

Must See?
Yes, as a classic of the genre. Listed as a film with Historical Importance in the back of Peary’s book.

Categories

• Genuine Classic
• Oscar Winner or Nominee

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Original Review
• Roger Ebert’s Review
• Q Network Review
• TCM Article
• Time Out Capsule Review

Synopsis:
As Mike (Michael Brandon) and Susan’s (Bonnie Bedelia) wedding approaches and Mike experiences cold feet, their friends and family members struggle with relationship issues of their own.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Bonnie Bedelia Films
• Diane Keaton Films
• Ensemble Cast
• Marital Problems
• Play Adaptations
• Romantic Comedy
• Weddings

Review:
Based on a play by married writing team Renee Taylor and Joseph Bologna, this ensemble romantic comedy (featuring the Oscar-winning song “For All We Know”, popularized by Karen Carpenter) still retains much of its charm and relevancy. Shifting between numerous serio-comic storylines — all focusing on the challenges inherent in either initiating or maintaining a romantic relationship — it features a host of fine performances by both little-known actors (i.e., Marian Hailey, whose film career went nowhere) and actors who would shortly make bigger names for themselves (i.e., a baby-faced Diane Keaton in her film debut). The film nicely infuses humor into such weighty issues as divorce, sexual dissatisfaction, and infidelity; and while some subplots are (naturally) more satisfying than others, all seem crafted with care.

Bedelia is lovely as the bride-to-be who knows exactly how to handle her nervous groom; we sense that this couple will stick it out, and their interactions serve as an effectively grounded counterpoint to the rest of the movie. The most blatantly comedic storyline follows a horny friend-of-the-groom (Bob Dishy) determined to “score” with the bride’s ditzy cousin (Hailey); their cat-and-mouse courtship offers some giggle-worthy surprises. Bea Arthur and Richard Castellano are note-perfect as the devout Catholic parents of Brandon and Joseph Hindy; their deep distress and bafflement at the dissolution of Hindy’s marriage to Diane Keaton is sensitively handled. Much less humorous (and not given enough screentime) is the depiction of an ongoing affair between the father of the bride (Gig Young) and a family friend (Anne Jackson); this scenario ultimately comes across as simply tragic in its inevitability. The most dated subplot — though it still packs a disturbing punch in its own way — shows Anne Meara’s happily married but sexually neglected housewife attempting to assuage her insecure husband (Harry Guardino).

Note: Taylor and Bologna’s follow-up film was the 1971 sleeper Made For Each Other, which deals in an even more brutally incisive fashion with relationship issues; they would make an interesting, emotionally loaded double-bill.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Fine performances by the entire ensemble cast
  
  
  
  
  
• An often clever, still largely relevant screenplay

Must See?
No, but it’s recommended. Listed as a Sleeper in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• Roger Ebert’s Review
• DVD Savant Review
• Classic Film Guide Review
• TCM Article

Synopsis:
A private (Dick Powell) stationed in Hawaii falls for a general’s engaged daughter (Ruby Keeler), who feigns disinterest in order to keep him out of trouble. When he becomes a cadet at West Point, he is dismayed to see her showing up and agreeing to star in a student-run musical.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Cross-Class Romance
• Dick Powell Films
• Frank Borzage Films
• “Let’s Put On a Show!”
• Military<
• Musicals
• Pat O’Brien Films
• Ruby Keeler Films

Review:
While some viewers refer to this escapist romantic musical as “utterly charming”, “spirited”, and “pleasant” (see comments on IMDb), I’m hard-pressed to find much of anything redeeming about it. Directed by Frank Borzage (though it might as well have been directed by Joe Schmoe, for all its distinctiveness), it was clearly meant to capitalize on the popularity of Powell and Keeler, who starred together as a romantic couple in no less than four films during the previous year-plus. Unfortunately, the storyline is not just innocuous (that’s to be expected in a film like this); it’s also inane, predictable, and (at times) insulting in its blatant anti-feminism. Cross-class romance? Fine, even if all Keeler gets to do is stand around and look charming. Glorifying West Point Academy? Well… okay, to a certain point (but a documentary would suit the bill much better). Showing every cadet at West Point going gaga for Keeler as soon as she appears? Now, come on; the girl’s cute, but not that cute. Inserting a “let’s put on a show” plot device to pull Keeler and Powell back together? Lame, lame, lame; this is when I finally tuned out completely.

Believe it or not, this clunker was nominated as one of the best pictures of the year (!!!!).

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• The Busby Berkeley-inspired Hawaiian dance number, as Powell woos Keeler at a luau
  

Must See?
No; definitely feel free to skip this one, unless you’re a diehard Oscar-nominee completist.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• History of the Academy Awards Review (scroll down)

Synopsis:
An ambitious orphan (Linda Darnell) falls in love with a nobleman (Cornel Wilde) during the Stuart Restoration, but her desire for social advancement at any cost compromises their relationship.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Cornel Wilde Films
• George Sanders Films
• Historical Drama
• Jessica Tandy Films
• Linda Darnell Films
• Obsessive Love
• Otto Preminger Films
• Richard Haydn Films
• Royalty and Nobility
• Social Climbers

Review:
Linda Darnell replaced Peggy Cummins at the last minute as the title character in this big-budget historical epic, directed by Otto Preminger and based on Kathleen Winsor’s notoriously scandalous bestseller about a “wench” in 17th century England, a “loose” woman who bears a child out of wedlock and sleeps with various men as needed to achieve her goals. Darnell is surprisingly effective as Amber, a willful, self-reliant woman with one fatal flaw: an undying love for a man (Wilde) who simply doesn’t love her as much in return. But because Wilde’s character is a bit of a wet blanket — and because we don’t sense much chemistry between these two nominal romantic leads — Amber’s obsession with him never quite rings as true as it should.

Meanwhile, the lengthy, overblown script — which attempts to cover the novel’s 900+ pages in 138 minutes — often drags, leading one to concede that Amber DOES last “forever”. Yet I’ll admit that eventually (in classic “page-turner” fashion) I found myself caught up in Amber’s fate, and curious to see what situation she would get herself into (and out of) next.

Watch for a couple of noteworthy supporting performances: George Sanders is perfectly cast as hedonistic King Charles II; while his screentime is limited, he’s given some pithy zingers, and pulls off a couple of memorable later scenes with typically droll panache. Richard Haydn is equally effective in a small role as the older titled man Amber ends up marrying, for better or for worse.

Note: Jessica Tandy appears in a small role as Amber’s prisonmate-turned-servant.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Linda Darnell as Amber
  
• George Sanders as King Charles II
  
• Richard Haydn as the Earl of Radcliffe
  

Must See?
No; this one is only must-see for Preminger completists or fans of period epics.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Original Review (spoiler alert!)
• All Movie Review
• Time Out Capsule Review

Synopsis:
In Victorian England, a gentleman named Phileas Fogg (David Niven) wagers his entire fortune that he can travel across the world in 80 days.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Cat-and-Mouse
• David Niven Films
• Detective and Private Eyes
• John Gielgud Films
• John Mills Films
• Jules Verne Adaptations
• Race Against Time
• Road Trip
• Robert Newton Films
• Shirley MacLaine Films

Review:
Despite its enormous popularity at the time of its release — it ran for three consecutive years in New York City, and won an Oscar as best picture of the year — Around the World in Eighty Days (based on the classic adventure novel by Jules Verne) is acknowledged by many these days as boring, too slow, and, quite frankly, not even close to best-picture-worthy material. Yet there’s no denying the visual impact of producer Michael Todd’s “Todd-AO” 70-mm cinematography — a direct result of his prior production work on Cinerama spectacles; and as a global travelogue (which is surely a part of what viewers at the time found appealing) it’s quite stunning. It’s actually rather mystical to look out the train window along with Fogg and his butler Passepartout (Mexican comedian Cantinflas) as they travel across the fields and plains of rural India, for instance.

As an adventure story, however, Around the World… falls surprisingly flat. Despite the built-in drama of Fogg literally racing against time to make it back to London (with his entire fortune at stake), the film takes its own sweet time stopping at sundry picturesque destinations, as various minor subplots are played out. A major narrative thread — involving a detective (Robert Newton, in his last film role) attempting to nab Fogg as a suspect in a bank robbery — is merely irritating, given that Newton literally shadows Fogg the entire trip, and should just arrest him already if he’s going to (though that would spoil the film’s infamous twist ending).

Meanwhile, Fogg’s growing romantic interest in a widowed Indian princess (Shirley MacLaine) rescued from a funeral pyre generates zero sparks, and is frustrating to watch given that it’s Passepartout, not Fogg, who risks his life to rescue her (but does she acknowledge him at all? not a chance!).

Speaking of Cantinflas — while there’s a certain historical interest in seeing the man who was the highest paid actor of his time (and I’m happy, as a Western viewer, to at least be acquainted with him), both his performance and his character are, to be blunt, irritating. (I’m sure he must have been more entertaining when filming in his native language in straight comedies — right?). Meanwhile, MacLaine — in skin-darkening make-up and Indian outfits — simply looks uncomfortable throughout, and barely registers (which is truly odd, given her notoriously quirky personality). And while Niven purportedly named this his favorite role of all time, his Fogg ultimately comes off as a rather bland (if undeniably resourceful and resilient) chap.

Niven, MacLaine, Newton, and Cantinflas are, of course, only a handful of the many “big name” stars who appear in the film — indeed, so many show up for cameos that this is credited as the movie that first popularized the term (and general concept) of a “cameo appearance”. And there is undeniably a certain amount of fun to be had in scanning for stars’ faces, given that they show up again and again; you may find yourself muttering out loud, “Could that be… Really? Yes, it is! But (s)he doesn’t even say a word!”

As Peary notes in his Alternate Oscars book, it was rather wise of Todd to offer “cameos to almost every actor in the universe”, since, as he notes, “How could the Academy members vote against their friends?” Touche.

Note: Saul Bass’s immensely clever closing credits (which essentially summarize the film in creative caricatures) are a fabulous ending to this dauntingly long (183-minute running time) film. On that note, you can cut at least a little bit out if you watch it at home on DVD, given that there are Entr’acte and Exit musical sequences to fast-forward through (the musical score is catchy, but not THAT catchy!).

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Truly impressive wide-screen Todd-AO cinematography
  
• Saul Bass’s inspired closing credits
  

Must See?
Yes, but only out of historical curiosity. Listed as a film with Historical Importance in the back of Peary’s book.

Categories

• Historically Relevant
• Oscar Winner or Nominee

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Original Review
• TCM Article
• Time Out Capsule Review

Synopsis:
The unscrupulous husband (Michael Caine) of a land-owning Southern heiress (Jane Fonda) attempts to buy out two small plots of land: one owned by his poor cousin (John Phillip Law) and his wife (Faye Dunaway), the other by a black farmer (Robert Hooks) whose mother (Beah Richards) was Fonda’s wetnurse.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• African Americans
• Burgess Meredith Films
• Deep South
• Faye Dunaway Films
• George Kennedy Films
• Jane Fonda Films
• Michael Caine Films
• Otto Preminger Films
• Race Relations
• Rex Ingram Films

Review:
Notoriously lambasted by critics and viewers alike, Otto Preminger’s adaptation of K.B. Gilden’s novel is perhaps best remembered today for the hellacious time its cast and crew members had working with Preminger (who described the film as “his most important project”). Anecdotes abound, with Caine apparently reporting to film critic Rex Reed that Preminger was “only happy when everybody else [was] miserable”, and Faye Dunaway (in her screen debut) so distressed by working with Preminger — who she insisted didn’t know “anything at all about the process of acting” — that she went to court and paid a large sum of money to get out of her five-film contract with him. Meanwhile, the very process of filming on southern soil during the height of Jim Crow racial tensions was incredibly stressful for all involved, with Hooks noting, “All of us were convinced that we were surrounded by some of the dumbest and meanest people on the face of the earth, to say nothing of being the most cowardly.”

Interestingly, the film itself is not really as bad as its reputation warrants — and its inclusion in the Medved brothers’ The Fifty Worst Films of All Time (1978) seems highly suspect. By focusing on the intersecting fates of three “representative” southern households — one white and monied, one white and poor, one black and poor — the film does make (perhaps unintended) “statements” about class and race in the South, but the primary characters themselves are reasonably nuanced (though not all are provided with enough screentime for full development). Most impressive is Jane Fonda, giving a compelling performance in a pivotal role as an unhappily married woman forced to confront her husband’s deception and malpractice; the film eventually becomes her story, and she does a fine job investing viewers in the discomfort of her character’s increasing cognitive dissonance. Diahann Carroll is also noteworthy in a small role that should have been fleshed out more fully.

However, the film most definitely has its share of “bad movie” moments and performances. Both Burgess Meredith as a bigoted lawyer and George Kennedy as a buffoonish sheriff are laughably one-dimensional; Caine’s southern accent falters a bit too often (though he IS, naturally, believable as a caddish heel); and Richards (in a tiny, underdeveloped role) gives a sensitive, heartbreaking performance — up until the moment her heart LITERALLY “breaks”, and she melodramatically pantomimes an attack. Meanwhile, Fonda and Caine’s emotionally disturbed son (John Mark) is never convincing (nor is the lame back-story attempting to explain why he suddenly “became” the way he is), and a number of essential plot elements — such as Law’s unconvincing friendship with Hooks (why does he slip in and out of bigotry?) — are handled sloppily. Finally, Hugo Montenegro’s energetic film score is ultimately inappropriate (it sounds better suited for a western), and egregiously misused at times.

With all that said, this is one you’ll have to watch for yourself to determine whether you consider to be an entirely skippable clunker, or a flawed but well-intentioned and occasionally compelling misfire.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Jane Fonda as Julie Ann Warren
  
• Diahann Carroll as Vivian Thurlow
  

Must See?
No, though film fanatics may be curious to check it out, given its historical notoriety.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• Roger Ebert’s Review
• DVD Savant Review
• Chicago Reader Capsule Review

Synopsis:
Residents on a South Seas Naval base are terrorized by acid-secreting monster trees transplanted from Antarctica.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Killer Plants
• Mamie Van Doren Films
• Military
• Science Fiction

Review:
Rated just 2.4 stars by users on IMDb, this notoriously awful sci-fi horror flick offers stunningly few redeeming qualities, even for diehard bad-movie aficionados. Clearly inspired by both The Thing From Another World (1951) and The Day of the Triffids (1962), it attempts to bank upon the (questionable) cinematic trope of killer plants — yet the “monsters” that appear on-screen are simply laughably non-menacing walking tree costumes.

Other than its intriguing alliterative title, this film is probably best known for co-starring Mamie Van Doren as a naval nurse with a penchant for wearing tightly revealing au couture uniforms; but even she herself was highly dismissive of her work here.

This clunker is most definitely skippable.

Note: You WILL have to watch the film for yourself if you want to understand the significance of the quote selected above; seriously, I can’t help you on that one.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Stanley Cortez’s cinematography
  

Must See?
No; definitely feel free to skip this one. Listed as a Camp Classic in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• SciFilm Review

Synopsis:
A group of American college students (Miles Chapin, David Marshall Grant, Blanche Baker, and Debra Winger) experience life and love while studying abroad at an institute in Paris.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• College
• Coming-of-Age
• Debra Winger Films
• Ensemble Cast
• Expatriates

Review:
A minor cult favorite among those with fond memories of watching it years ago, this coming-of-age tale is, unfortunately, a real miss. Writer/director Willard Huyck (who wrote the screenplay for American Graffiti, a clear inspiration) can’t seem to find an appropriate tone or pace for his film, which veers wildly from sophomoric situational humor to romantic tenderness and introspection, and never manages to establish a strong sense of cohesion among the characters. The most engaging narrative thread follows the travails of nerdy Miles Chapin, who falls for and successfully woos a Parisian shopgirl (appealing newcomer Valérie Quennessen); the film should have focused on their story exclusively. Instead, we’re forced to sit through the much less convincing — and infinitely more irritating — storyline involving Grant’s crush on the exchange institute’s sexy director (Marie-France Pisier), who (for selfish and entirely unethical reasons of her own) encourages his fantasies. (NB: Jean Rochefort as her philandering husband is essentially a cameo.)

Meanwhile, the screenplay’s other purported protagonists are given surprisingly short shrift. Blanche Baker (Carroll Baker’s daughter) shows up sporadically throughout the first half of the film, but only in voiceover, valiantly dictating cheerful postcards to a phantom boyfriend back at home while actually having a miserable, lonely time. When she’s finally given some screentime later in the film, she’s reduced to playing a potential rape victim in a series of ludicrously tasteless scenes with Mandy Patinkin (playing a lecherous Iranian travel agent). And while film fanatics may be mildly curious to check this film out simply to see Debra Winger in one of her earliest roles, be forewarned: her character is literally almost non-existent.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Valérie Quennessen as Toni
  

Must See?
No; definitely feel free to skip this clunker.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Original Review
• Roger Ebert’s Review